.f 


\^ 


:.v    K. 


I 


,  t ' 


a\\=J^ 


k:\'^\ 


Sj'.\ 

*  's'^  !. 

E 

^^l 

>  '■■  '■> "  ■- ' 

m'^'} 


\  \ 


M^- 


\ 


I  Vv 


"    ^  \   \   \ 


y  »  t 


i 

■ 


< 


'J 


M 


in  the  ®ittj  0f  il^w  %)0vh 


THE   CONTINUITY 


Ei)e  Cijuvcij  of  ^u^lauti 


IX  THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY: 


2^100   Discourses: 


AN   APPENDIX   AND  NOTES. 


REV.  SAMUEL  SEABURY,  D.  D., 
Hector  of  ll)c  ((TfjurrJ)  of  iJjc  Slnnunciation,  Kctt)='3t'orfe. 


"  Wc  do  not  challenge  a  new  Church,  a  new  religion,  or  new  Iloly  Orders;  we  obtrude  no 
innovation  upon  others,  nor  desire  to  have  any  obtruded  on  ourselves  ;  we  pluck  up  the 
weeds,  but  retain  all  the  plants  of  saving  truth."' 

Bramhall. 

"  Concors  Romance  et  reformatae  Ecclesise  fides, 
Neutrius  opinio,  mihi  religio  est." 


Nc  to -Work: 

P  U  D  X  E  Y      &       RUSSELL; 

No.  79  Joh.n-Steeet. 

1853. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  by  Pcjdney  &  Russell,  in  the  Clerk's 
Office  of  the  U.  S.  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  New-York. 


PREFACE. 


The  following  discourses  were  designed  to  explain  and  defend 
the  position  of  the  Church  of  England,  so  far  as  it  involves  that  of 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States  ;  and  they  are 
published  at  the  instance  of  several  of  the  author's  parishioners, 
whose  partiality  to  him  naturally  led  them  to  overrate  their  import- 
ance, and  whose  wishes  a  reciprocal  feeling  on  his  part  rendered  it 
impossible  for  him  to  resist. 

The  Appendix  and  Notes  are  intended  to  furnish  documentary 
proof  of  the  chief  points  made  in  the  discourses,  and  to  unfold,  more 
fully  than  their  limits  allowed,  some  of  the  principles  advanced  in 
them. 

The  purpose  of  the  first  discourse  is,  to  show  that  the  Church  of 
England,  in  renouncing  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  and 
reforming  itself  ^rom  the  errors  and  corruptions  of  Popery,  under- 
went no  organic  change,  but  retained  the  ministry,  faith  and  sacra- 
ments of  Christ,  and  fulfilled  the  conditions  necessary  to  their 
transmission. 

The  resolution  of  the  Church  of  England  to  be  loyal  to  the  State, 
and  to  maintain  the  Catholic  Faith  Avithout  the  abuses  and  corrup- 
tions of  later  times,  was  firm  and  unyielding  ;  and  the  consequence 
was,  that  the  Pope  of  Home  was  at  length  constrained  to  command 
his  subjects  to  leave  the  communion  of  a  Church  which  he  was  un- 
able to  reclaim  to  his  obedience.  The  attitude  thus  assumed  by  the 
papacy  put  an  end  for  ever  to  all  hopes  of  reconciliation  between 


188955 


IV  PREFACE. 

ttie  Church  of  England  and  the  Church  of  Rome.  It  led  imme- 
diately to  the  separation  of  the  Romanists  in  England  from  the 
national  Church  ;  and  the  second  discourse,  and  the  notes  appended 
to  it,  set  before  the  reader  the  nature  of  this  separation,  (the  first 
that  was  made  from  the  Church  of  England  after  the  Reformation,) 
and  the  agencies  by  which  it  was  effected. 

On  the  defection  of  the  Romanists,  the  English  nation  found  itself 
in  possession  of  a  Church,  which  was  confessed  by  all  to  be 
"  the  eye  of  the  Reformation,"*  and  "  the  bulwark  of  Protestantism." 
Possessed  of  a  primitive  worship  and  a  learned  ministry,  and  debased 
by  no  mixtures  of  enthusiasm  or  superstition,  this  Church  gave  a  de- 
finite purpose  and  permanent  form  to  the  awakened  spirit  of  liberty 
and  devotion.  It  stood  forth  the  foremost  defender  of  the  rights  and 
liberties  of  national  Churches,  (and  through  them  of  the  individuals 
that  composed  them,)  against  a  spiritual  power,  having  its  centre  at 
Rome,  but  laying  claim  to  universal  dominion,  and  subjecting,  as  far 
as  in  it  lay,  the  temporal  power.^f  every  nation  to  its  own  control. 
It  was  able  to  detect  the  forgeries  and  impostures  of  Rome  ;  it  had 
given  her  no  advantage  by  running  from  her  into  any  extreme  ;  it 
was  a  national  body  already  formed ;  a  body  both  Christian  and 
legal  ;  a  body  which  commended  itself  to  the  civil  powers  by  the 
loyalty  of  its  constitution,  and  which  was  every  way  adapted  to  work 
in  its  members  that  sober  and  substantial  piety  which  makes  religion 
a  "reasonable  service."! 

The  Reformation  virtually  placed  the  appointment  of  the  officers 
of  this  Church  in  the  lay  power,  i.  e.  the  power  of  the  people  ;  it 
also  restored  to  the  people  the  munificent  endowments  which  the 
piety  ef  their  ancestors  had  bequeathed,  to  be  held  in  trust  for  the 
sacred  purposes  for  which  they  were  given ;  and  in  all  legislative 
and  judicial  matters  (save  only  such  as  were  merely  spiritual)  it  put 
the  temporal  on  a  par  with  the  spiritual  power,  so  that  "  both  their 
authorities  and  jurisdictions,"  to  use  the  words  of  24  Henry  VIII. 
declaring  the  king  the  "  supreme  head  of  the  Church  of  England," 

*  Florentissima  Anglia,  Ocellus  ille  Ecclesiarum.  Peculium  Christi  singulare 
&c. — Diodati. 

t  See  London  Cases,  vol.  ii.     Argument  for  Union. 


might  "  conjoin  together  in  the  due  administration  of  justice,  the  one 
to  help  the  other"  Moreover,  this  Church  prescribed  no  sinful  term 
of  communion,  the  only  thing  which  justified  separation  from  the 
Church  of  Rome  ;*  and  it  laid  no  other  limitation  on  natural  liberty 
of  conscience  than  the  Word  of  God  as  held  by  the  common  sense 
of  Christendom,  or  the  universal  judgment  of  the  Church  ;  in  eflfect 
none  other  than  is,  by  the  consent  of  Christians  from  the  apostles' 
time,  laid  on  it  by  God  himself  under  the  Christian  Dispensation. 
Whatever  else  this  Church  required,  was  considered  by  her  to  be  in 
itself  dispensable  and  mutable,  and  was  required  only  for  the  sake  of 
peace  and  union,  and  not  as  a  term  of  communion  necessary  to  sal- 
vation. 

Such  was  the  Church  which  the  good  providence  of  God,  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  bestowed  on  the  people  of  England.  It  was  only 
necessary  that  the  English  people  should  sustain  and  support  their 
Church,  by  conforming  to  its  services  and  co-operating  Avith  its 
ministry,  in  order  to  render  it  an  effectual  barrier  against  the  return 
of  Popery,  and  to  incite  the  Catholic  Churches  of  the  several  na- 
tions of  Europe,  then  ripe  for-  the  movement,  to  reform  themselves  on 
the  same  model,  and  to  free  themselves  from  the  same  yoke.  In  a 
word,  union  and  co-operation  with  their  Church,  on  the  part  of  the 
English  people,  would  have  kept  her  in  the  position  which  she  had 
taken,  and  beyond  which  no  advance  has  yet  been  made — the  fore- 
most in  the  progress  of  Christianity  and  civilization. 

But,  unhappily,  the  English  people,  as  a  body,  did  not  co-operate 

*.  Calvin  pronounces  his  judgment  on  this  matter  with  characteristic  boldness  : 
''  Wherever  the  Word  of  God  is  duly  preached  and  reverently  attended  to,  and 
the  true  use  of  the  sacraments  kept  up,  there  is  the  plain  appearance  of  a  true 
Church,  whose  authority  no  man  may  safely  despise,  or  reject  its  admonitions, 
or  resist  its  counsels,  or  set  at  nought  its  discipline,  much  less  separate  from  it, 
and  violate  its  unity  ;  for  our  Lord  has  so  great  regard  to  the  unity  of  his 
Church,  that  he  accounts  him  an  apostate  from  his  religion  who  obstinately 
separates  from  any  Christian  society  which  keeps  up  the  true  ministry  of  the 
Word  and  Sacraments.  Such  a  separation  is  a  denial  of  God  and  Christ  ;  and 
it  is  a  dangerous  and  pernicious  temptation  so  much  as  to  think  of  separating^from 
such  a  Church,  the  communion  whereof  is  never  to  be  rejected,  so  long  as  it 
continues  in  the  true  use  of  the  Word  and  Sacraments,  though  otherwise  it  be 
overrun  with  many  blemishes  and  corruptions." — Quoted  in  London  Cases,vol.  ii., 
with  reference  to  Institut.  Lib.  4,  Sect.  10,  11,  13. 


vi  PREFACE. 

with  their  Church.     Remarkably  enough,  the  secession  of  the  Ro- 
manists, instead  of  cementing  the  union  of  those  that  remained,  was 
soon  followed  by  the  separation,  one  after  another,  on  various  pre- 
texts, of  A'arious  bodies  of  Protestant  Dissenters.     Some  of  these 
demanded  a  more  "  spiritual"  religion  ;  others  of  them  clamored  for 
"  the  loaves  and  fishes,"  seeking  to   have  their  own  denomination 
established  by  law,  in  place  of  the  Church  which  they  had  left ;  and 
others  of  them  declaimed  against  all  establishment  of  religion  by 
law  ;  quoting  our  Lord's  words,  "  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world," 
and  making  them  good  by  letting  his  kingdom  evaporate  in  a  meta- 
phor, that  so  there  might  be  no  spiritual  body  in  though  not  of  the 
world,  to  which  a  temporal  government  could  be  united ;  aiming  to 
denationalize  the  Church,  in  order  that  they  might  evangelize  the 
nation-  anew  ;  to  pull  down  for  the  sake  of  building  up.     In  fine, 
instead  of  cleaving  to  the  spiritual  body  already  made  to  their  hands, 
and  working  in  and  through  it  for  the  propagation  of  religion,  the 
English  people  (who  never  disclaim  for  themselves  the  credit  of  be- 
ing the  most  practical  people  on  earth)   have,  in   great  numbers, 
looked  with  coldness  on  their  Church ;  have  attributed  to  it  many 
faults  which  it  has  not,  and  shown  no  patience  with  those  which  it 
has  ;  have,  in  a  word,  reviled  and  forsaken  their  Church,  and  arrayed 
themselves  in  hostility  against  it.     To  the  beginning  of  this  course 
they  have,  perhaps,  been  instigated  more  than  they  are  willing  to 
believe  by  the   papists  ;*  in  its  progress  they  have  been   steadily 
assisted  by  the  papists  ;  and  at  this  day  they  are  in  league  with  the 
papists  for  its  consummation. 

In  justice,  however,  to  the  Protestant  Dissenters  from  the  Church 
of  England,  it  should  be  remembered,  that  most  of  the  secessions 
referred  to  took  place  under  the  Tudors  and  the  Stuarts,  before  the 
government  of  Great  Britain  was  settled  on  its  present  constitutional 
basis,  and  while  the  crown  was,  in  most  points,  at  war  with  the 
people,  instead  of  being  made,  as  now,  to  represent  their  opinions 
and  to  reflect  their  will. 

In  such  a  state  of  things,  the   h/i/  power  and  influence  which  it 

*  See  Appendix  V. 


PREFACE.  Vll 

had  been  the  purpose  of  the  Reformation  to  assert  and  vindicate, 
passed  to  the  people  in  name,  but  not  in  fact ;  the  crown  and  par- 
liament, who  represented  and  exercised  the  legitimate  lay  element 
of  the  Church,  having  almost  as  little  sympathy  with  the  people  as 
the  Pope  and  his  Cardinals  who  had  absorbed  and  extinguished  that 
element ;  and  the  people  as  a  body  being,  under  the  one  as  well 
as  xthe  other,  effectually  shut  out  from  the  just  sphere  of  their  in- 
fluence in  the  election  of  Church  officers,  the  management  of  Church 
property,  and  the  enactment  of  Church  laAvs. 

But,  whatever  may  have  been  the  causes  of  these  secessions,  the 
result  has  been  to  weaken  the  fences  erected  against  the  papal 
power,  and  to  give  it  strength  and  activity  for  new  aggressions. 
Instead  of  a  compact  national  body,  with  its  divinely  appointed 
ministry  and  sacraments,  its  traditionary  faith,  its  settled  prescfip- 
tions  and  usages,  and  its  well-defined  and  impregnable  lines  of  op- 
position to  the  encroachments  and  corruptions  of  the  papal  power, 
the  English  people  now  present  a  distracted  front  of  numerous  sects, 
formed  upon  upstart  theories,  pursuing  the  most  airy  phantoms,  and 
united  in  hostility  to  Rome  only  on  grounds  that  are  equally  subver- 
sive of  principles  which  lie  at  the  foundation  of  the  Christian  reli- 
gion, and  give  it  all  its  permanence  and  vitality. 

In  asserting  and  vindicating  personal  rights  and  liberty  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  encroachments  of  the  crown  and  the  aristocracy,  the 
Protestant  Dissenters  were  foremost ;  and  I  am  as  ready  as  any 
man  to  admire  the  sturdy  independence  and  heroism  which  they  dis- 
played. Viewed,  however,  in  reference  to  the  spiritual  despotism 
of  which  papal  Rome  was  and  is  the  head  and  centre,  this  contes't 
was  one  of  the  people  among  themselves,  the  king  and  the  peasant 
both  belonging  to  the  same  body  ;  and  when  the  question  is  consi- 
dered in  this  aspect,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Church  of  England 
has  taken  the  lead  in  asserting  and  vindicating  the  rights  and  liber- 
ties of  the  people  in  opposition  to  papal  usurpation  and  tyranny. 
So  early  as  the  sixteenth  century  the  Church  of  England,  (as 
it  is,  in  part,  the  aim  of  the  following  pages  to  show,)  had  as- 
serted the  rights  of  the  people  and  liberty  of  conscience  ;  and  had 


Vlll  PREFACE. 

placed  botli  on  a  foundation  than  Avliicli  the  Protestants  who  have 
since  separated  from  her  communion  have  shown  none,  in  my 
opinion,  more  definite  and  more  stable. 

The   British  Provinces,   which   afterwards   became    the  United 
States,   were   chiefly  settled  by  those   Protestant  Dissenters  who, 
under  the  dynasty  of  the  Tudors  and  the  Stuarts,  had  asserted  the 
cause   of  popular  rights   and  liberty  against  the   crown,  and  who, 
from  the  connection  of  Church  and  State,  were  naturally  led  to  re- 
gard the  Church,  in  the  form  in  which  it  was  established,  as  their 
enemy ;  and  to  make  it,  equally  with  the   temporal  government  to 
which  it  was  allied,  the  object  of  their  assaults.     They  were  settled 
also  in  part  by  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  who,  in  defend- 
ing the  principles  of  their  Church,  and  opposing  the  counter  opinions 
of  "the  denominations  around  them,  were  as  naturally  led,  in  the  con- 
test between  the  crown  and  the   people,  to  side  with  the  former 
against  the  latter.     I  speak  only,  oC  course,  of  the  tendencies  of  the 
two    systems,    making    due    allowance    for    individual    exceptions. 
When  the  independence  of  the  colonies  was  acknowledged,  the  re- 
lations of  the  parties  were  changed.     Many  of  the  supporters  of  the 
crown  removed  to  the  mother  country,  or  to  those  colonies  which 
still  acknowledged  her  sovereignty  ;  while  those  who  remained  soon 
ceased  to  be  distinguished,  by  their  political  opinions,  from  the  rest 
of' their  countrymen.     On  the  other  hand,  the  successors  of  those 
who  had  separated  from  the  Church  of  England  abated  their  jealousy 
and  aversion  towards  the  Episcopal  Church.     The  introduction  of 
bishops,  which  they  had  before  so  strenuously  opposed  as  to  render 
it  in  a  high  degree  impolitic  for  the  mother  country  to  grant,  they 
not  only  ceased  to  object  to,  but  even  consented  to  facilitate  by  all 
the  good  offices  in  their  power.     The  divine  institution  of  Episco- 
pacy, the  relative  holiness  of  certain  times  and  places. set  apart  for 
religious  purposes,  the  order  for  Daily,  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer, 
the  forms  for  the  administration  of  the  holy  Sacraments,  and  other 
ordinances,  religious  vestments,  and  all    our  distinctive    doctrines 
and  usages,  which,  when  imposed  under  the  crown  by  legal  enact- 
ments,   had  been    visited    with  unmitigated    odium,    began  to  find 


PREFACE. 


favor  with  the  people,  when  they  were  no  longer  sought  to  be  bound 
on  them  without  their  own  consent,  and  were  upheld  only  by  the 
moral  power  and  sanction  of  the  Church ;  and  it  is  a  remarkable 
fact  that  the  Episcopal  Church,  which  at  the  beginning  of  our  civil 
independence  was  reduced  almost  to  extinction,  has  grown  to  its 
present  large  and  flourishing  state  chiefly  by  means  of  accessions 
from  those  religious  bodies  which  had  separated  from  the  mother 
Church.  The  phase  thus  presented  is,  in  truth,  a  new  development 
of  the  Reformation  ;  in  which  the  rights  (with  their  correlative  du- 
ties) that  were  at  first  asserted  for  the  crown  in  opposition  to  the 
papal  supremacy,  havQ  at  length  passed  to  the  people  in  fact  as  well 
as  in  name. 

,  The  natural  inference  from  these  facts  is,  tjjat  if  the  inhabitants 
of  Great  Britain  wish  to  arrest  the  growth  of  Popery,  they  should 
rally-around  their  Church,  study  its  institutions,  and  imbibe  its  spirit, 
content,  (as  indeed  they  have  reason  to  be  happy)  that,  Avhile 
living  the  Church's  life,  they  may  now  exert  that  influence  on  her  go- 
vernment which  the  silent  change  of  their  Constitution  has  secured  for 
them  ;  and  that  in  thiscountry  the  main  security  against  the  same  evil 
consists  in  the  distinct  and  firm  avowal,  by  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church,  of  the  Divine  Institution  of  her  ministry,  and  of  those  funda- 
mental principles  which  she  has  received  from  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land ;  and  in  not  suffering  her  strength  to  be  weakened,  as  her 
numbers  are  increased,  by  an  infusion  from  religious  bodies  which 
reject  those  principles. 

In  the  present  day,  the  various  religious  bodies,  Roman  and  Protes- 
tant, appear  to  be  reti'acing  their  old'lines  of  demarcation,  and  recon- 
noitering  as  if  for  a  new  conflict.  The  Romanists,  in  particular, 
emboldened  by  their  powerful  alliances  on  the  Continent  of  Europe, 
by  the  fatuous  concessions  which  have  been  made  to  them  in  Great 
Britain,  and  by  the  nvnnbers  with  which  the  tide  of  immigration  has 
swollen  their  ranks  in  this  country,  have  assumed  a  more  confident 
tone  than  at  any  previous  time  since  the  Reformation  ;  repudiating, 
for  the  most  part,  the  softened  explanations  of  their  tenets  which 
they  used  to  pvit  forth,  drawing  tighter  the  reins  of  spiritual  power, 


X  PREFACE. 

seeking  to  make  themselves  felt  as  a  distinct  religious  body  in 
worldly  politics,  and  being,  in  all  respects,  at  much  less  pains  than 
formerly  to  disguise  the  true  theory  and  genius  of  their  Church.  In 
such  a  state  of  things,  it  is  well  for  us  to  bear  distinctly  in  mind  the 
causes  which  led  to  their  separation  from  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, in  order  that  Ave  may  perceive  the  consequences  which  would 
result  from  a  re-admission  of  their  claims ;  and  to  be  guarded,  at 
the  same  time,  against  any  concessions  which  may  compromise  the 
character  of  our  Church  as  a  continuous  hody  ;  founded  on  the  same 
Faith,  governed  by  the  §ame  Ministry,  united  in  the  same  Sacra- 
ments, quickened  by  the  same  Breath,  living  the  same  Life,  nour- 
ished by  the  same  Word,  and.  being  in  very  truth  the  same  Body 
Avhich  our  Lord  Je§us  Christ  formed  on  earth  before  His  ascei^- 
sion,  and  promised  to  be  with,  by  the  secret  energy  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  If  the  following  pages  are 
found,  by  God's  blessing,  to  further  these  ends,  and  help  others  in 
the  detection  of  Roman  errors  without  detriment  to  the  Catholic 
Faith,  tl^  author's  highest  hopes  respecting  them  Avill  be  realized. 


THE 


fatiiuuig  0f  %  C|iird]  0f  05iiglaiiii. 


DISCOURSE    I. 


HeSrews  xiii.,  17. 

"  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,  and  submit  yourselves  ;  for  they 
watch  for  your  souls,  as  they  that  must  give  account." 

Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  liath  purcliased  to 
himself  an  universal  Church,  hath  promised  to  be  with 
the  ministers  of  apostolic  succession  to  the  end  of  the 
world.^-  By  the  ministers  of  apostolic  succession  are 
meant  those  who  have  succeeded  to  the  Holy  Apostles 
both  in  the  orders  which  they  received,  in  the  doctrine 
which  they  taught,  and  in  the  right  to  govern  the 
Church  agreeably  to  the  laws  and  institutions  of  our 
Saviour  Christ  ;  and  it  is  on  the  supposition  that  they 
who  now  rule  over  us  in  our  spiritual  concerns  have 
lawfully  succeeded  to  the  Holy  Apostles  in  authority 
and  doctrine,  that  we  yield  them  due  obedience,  and 
rely  on  the  j)romise  of  the  Head  of  the  Church  to  own 
2is  as  His  members,  and  to  be  present  with  us  in  the 
energy  of  that  Holy  Spirit  whom  He  hath  sent  from 
the  Father. 

No  question  is  made  of  the  apostolic  succession  of 

*  "  O  Holy  Jesus,  who  hast  purchased  to  thyself  an  universal  Church,  and 
hast  promised  to  be  with  the  ministers  of  apostolic  succession  to  the  end  of  the 
world,  be  graciously  pleased,"  &c. — Office  of  Institution  in  tke  Prayer-  BooJc. 


the  Cliurcli  of,  England  (from  wliicli  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Ohurcli  in  these  United  States  has  confess- 
edly derived  both  its  orders  and  doctrine)  until  the 
time  of  the  sixteenth  century ;  none  at  least  by  any 
persons  who  own  the  Church  of  Christ  to  be  a  corpo- 
rate body,  capable  of  perpetuating  itself,  and  of  secur- 
ing to  its  members  forever  the  same  rights  with  which 
they  were  originally  invested.  From  the  changes, 
however,  which  were  then  made  in  the  Church  of  En- 
gland, occasion  has  been  taken  to  charge  her  with  a 
departure  from  the  Apostolic  rule :  to  meet  which 
objections,  (such  of  them,  at  least,  as  are  worthy  of 
consideration,)  T  purpose  on  this  day^'  to  vindicate  our 
claim  to  the  Apostolic  Succession  in  Orders  and  Juris- 
diction, touching  also,  incidentally,  on  the  question  of 
succession  in  doctrine.  In  other  words,  I  purpose  to 
show  that  the  Church  of  England,  in  the  eventful 
changes  of  the  sixteenth  century,  preserved  its  own 
continuity,  and  maintained,  as  far  as  in  it  lay,  the  unity 
of  Christ's  mystical  Body. 

To  understand  the  state  of  the  question,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  premise  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  had,  in  times 
preceding  the  Reformation,  claimed  to  be  the  Head  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  the  source  and  fountain  of  all  its 
power  and  jurisdiction,  and,  in  virtue  of  this  alleged 
supremacy,  to  exercise  a  sovereign  control  over  the 
English  Church  and  nation.  In  the  reign  of  Henry 
VIIL,  however,  an  occasion  was  given  for  an  exj^res- 
sion  of  the  true  sense  of  the  Ens^lish  Church  in  refer- 
ence  to  the  ground  and  validity  of  this  extravagant 
claim.  For  this  monarch,  who  (whether  deservedly 
or  not)  had  been  honored  by  the  See  of  Rome  with 

*  The  second  Sunday  in  Lent,  being  one  of  the  four  stated  times  of  Ordina- 
tion. 


tlie  title  of  Defender  of  the  Faith,^  and  liad  received 
its  apostolic  benediction  for  himself  and  all  his  j)os- 
terity,  propounded  to  the  Bishops  and  Clergy  in  the 
Provincial  Synods  of  England,  to  the  celebrated  Uni- 
versities, and  to  the  great  Monasteries  of  the  kingdom, 
the  following  question,  viz  :  "  Whether  the  Bishop  of 
Home  hath  any  greater  jurisdiction  conferred  on  him 
in  Holy  Scripture,  in  this  realm  of  England,  than  any 
other  foreign  Bishop  ?" — requiring  them,  like  men  of 
virtue  and  2^1'ofound  literature,  (so  ran  the  directions 
to  the  University  of  Oxford,)  diligently  to  intreat, 
examine,  and  discuss  the  same,  and  to  return  their 
opinions,  in  writing,  under  their  common  seal,  to  the 
"  mere  and  sincere  truth  of  the  same."f 

This  question  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  whole 
controversy,  and  it  is  therefore  important  to  note  both 
the  answer  and  the  unanimity  with  which  it  was  given. 
The  answer  was,  that  "  the  Bishop  of  Rome  has  not 
any  greater  jurisdiction  conferred  on  him  in  Holy 
Scripture,  in  this  realm  of  England,  than  any  other 
foreign  Bishop." 

The  declaration  is  guarded.  It  makes  no  reference 
to  the  Orders  of  the  Roman  Pontiff;  that  is,  to  his 
character  as  a  Bishop  or  Vicar  of  Ciieist,  but  only  to 
his  jurisdiction  or  power  of  government.  J  It  does  not 
deny  the  right  of  his  jurisdiction  in  Italy,  nor  the  fact 
of  his  jurisdiction  in  England.  It  simply  denies  that 
jurisdiction  is  conferred  on  him  by  the  Divine  Law  in 
the  realm  of  Eno;land.    Within  these  limitations,  how- 

*  See  Appendix  A.  +  See  Appendix  B. 

t  By  Orders,  is  meant  the  power  to  preach  the  Word  and  administer  the  Sacra- 
ments of  the  New  Law  in  the  name  of  Christ.  The  power  of  conferring  Orders, 
vested  by  Christ's  institution  exclusively  in  bishops,  is  derived  to  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  in  common  with  other  bishops,  called  also  vicars  of  Christ.  Orders  may 
exist  without  the  power  of  jurisdiction,  as  in  the  case  of  a  church  possessed  of 
a  valid  ministry  and  sacraments,  but  involved  in  heresy  or  schism.  Jurisdiction, 
so    far  as  it  is  merely  spiritual,  and  conferred  by  Christ  as  the  Head  of  the 


ever,  tlie  denial  is  absolute,  since  no  other  foreign 
bishop  pretended  to  any  jurisdiction  whatever  in  En- 
gland. 

In  this  answer  all  the  bishops  of  England  united, 
with  the  exception  of  Fisher,  Bishop  of  Rochester. 
The  Provincial  Synods  of  Canterbury  and  York,  the 
Universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  the  chapters 
and  convents  throughout  the  kingdom,  gave  one  and 
the  same  answer  :  The  Bishop  of  Rome  has  no  greater 
jurisdiction  conferred  on  him  in  Holy  Scripture,  in 
this  realm  of  England,  than  any  other  foreign  bishop  ; 
that  is,  under  the  limitations  aforesaid,  no  jurisdiction 
whatever.  In  the  deliberate  judgment,  therefore,  of 
the  Church  of  England,  while  yet  it  was  in  full  com- 
munion with  the  Church  of  Rome,  the  jurisdiction 
which  the  Bishoj)  of  Rome  had  exercised  in  England 
was  a  human  arrangement  and  not  a  di\ane  ordinance ; 
a  power  of  man's  concession  and  not  of  God's  prescrip- 
tion.* 

Soon  after  this,  Cranmer  being  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, a  convocation  of  the  English  clergy  was  held 
at  Lambeth,  "  to  set  forth  a  plain  and  sincere  doctrine 
concerning  the  whole  sum  of  all  those  things  which 
appertain  unto  the  profession  of  a  Christian  man."  In 
this  work,  which  was  aj)proved  by  the  two  archbishops 
and  nineteen   of  the  bishops,  it  was  asserted  as  the 

Church,  cannot  exist  without  Orders,  and  in  connection  with  orders  constitutes 
what  is  called  the  power  of  the  Keys  ;  that  is,  the  power  to  define  the  Faith 
of  Christ,  (in  other  words,  to  declare  what  is  and  what  is  not  heresy,)  to  absolve 
penitents,  to  excommunicate  the  openly  vicious,  to  degrade  unworthy  clergy- 
men, and,  in  general,  to  discharge  all  those  functions  which  are  necessary  to 
preserve  and  continue  the  Church  as  a  corporate  or  politic  body,  independent  of 
the  world.  For  further  remarks  on  the  subject  of  jurisdiction,  and  a  com- 
parative view  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Churches  of  Rome  and  England  on  the 
relation  of  the  spiritual  to  the  temporal  power,  see  Appendix  D. 
*  See  Appendix  0. 


sense  of  the  English  Church,  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
for  several  hundred  years  after  Christ,  had  no  primacy 
or  governance  above  any  other  bishop  out  of  his  own 
province  in  Italy  ;  that  his .  existing  power  was  the  re- 
sult of  successive  and  gradual  usurpations,  and  was 
exercised  in  violation  of  the  ancient  canons,  and  of  his 
own  oath,  which  bound  him  to  observe  the  canons. 

In  making  this  declaration  there  was  no  intention  to 
sei:)arate  from  the  Catholic  Church,'"  or  to  disregard  its 
authority.  On  the  contrary,  the  declaration  was  justi- 
fied by  the  ancient  canons  ;  according  to  which  it  was 
contended  that  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  every 
national  church  had  power  to  order  all  matters  within 
themselves,  so  long  as  they  kept  to  the  faith  and  unity 
of  the  Catholic  Church. 

The  supreme  jurisdiction  of  the  realm  being  denied 
to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  devolved,  so  far  as  it  was 
merely  spiritual,  to  the  Bishops  of  the  English  Church, 
and  so  far  as  it  was  outward  and  coercive,  to  the 
crown.  Hence  the  next  step  in  the  Reformation  was 
a  parliamentary  statute,  declaring  the  King,  for  all 
purposes  of  outward  and  coercive  jurisdiction,  to  be 
the  Head  of  the  English  Church,  and  empowering 
him  and  his  successors  to  redress  and  reform  all  abuses 
which  may  be  lawfully  reformed,  to  the  increase  of 
Christ's  religion,  and  of  the  peace  and  unity  of  the 
realm.f 

The  way  was  now  open  for  the  Church  of  England, 
under  the  protection  of  the  state,  to  do  without  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  what  it  had  in  vain  sought  to  do  with 
him ;  that  is,  to  correct  sundry  abuses  and  corruptions 
of  religion  which  prevailed  among  the  peoj^le.  One  of 
the  first  things  done  was  to  translate  the  Holy  Scrip- 

*  See  30th  Canon  of  1603,  as  quoted  in  the  next  sermon. 
t  See  Appendix  D. 


tures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Some  advances 
were  also  made  towards  allowing  tlie  use  of  tlie  En- 
glish language  in  the  public  services  of  the  Church,  by 
the  ^publication  of  the  Creed,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and 
the  Ten  Commandments,  together  with  prayers,  suf- 
frages, and  hymns,  and  select  passages  of  Scrij)tui'e  for 
morning  and  evening  devotion.  A  Litany  also,  much 
like  that  now  in  use,  was  set  forth  in  English,  to  be 
said  alternately  by  the  priest  and  the  people,  together 
with  some  excellent  prayers  for  private  devotion. 
Creej^ing  to  the  cross  and  other  like  superstitions  were 
abolished. 

Shortly  afterwards,  in  the  reign  of  Edward  VL,  the 
Holy  Eucharist  was  administered  in  both  kinds,  and 
restored  to  its  ancient  character  of  a  communion  as 
well  as  a  sacrifice ;  while  the  office  for  administering  it 
was  adajDted  to  these  changes,  and  translated  into  the 
English  language. 

A  commission  was  also  appointed,  consisting  of  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  other  learned  and  dis- 
creet bishojDS,  to  prepare  a  complete  collection  of  di- 
vine offices  in  the  English  language,  and  the  result  was 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  which  was  first  used  on 
"Whitsunday,  1549.'''  Li  1552  the  Prayer-Book  was 
again  set  forth  by  Convocation,  with  some  alterations, 
together  with  the  Articles  of  Keligion  and  a  Bt)ok  of 
Ordination,  the  same  for  substance  as  those  which  are 
now  in  use. 

These  changes  were  made  with  the  consent  of  the 
archbishops  and  a  large  majority  of  the  bishops.  Some 
five  or  six  of  the  bishops  dissentecl,f  and  these  were 

*  See  Appendix  E. 

t  Viz  :  Bonner  of  London,  Gardiner  of  Winchester,  Day  of  Chichester, 
Heath  of  Worcester,  Voysey  of  Exeter,  and  Tunstall  of  Durham.  The  two 
latter  are  said  by  some  to  have  resigned. 


displaced,  and  others  were  ordained  and  settled  in 
their  sees  according  to  tlie  laws  of  tlie  Church  and  the 
usual  customs  of  those  times. 

Thus  far  at  least  there  was  no  departure  from  the 
Apostolical  Succession  either  in  orders  or  in  doctrine. 
Not  in  orders,  for  the  bishops  then  living  were,  by  the 
confession  of  all  parties,  the  lawful  successors  of  the 
Apostles :  not  in  doctrine,  for  the  rule  by  which  they 
proceeded  in  the  changes  which  they  made  was  the 
Word  of  God,  interpreted  by  catholic  tradition  and  all 
truly  universal  councils.  They  avowed  their  determi- 
nation to  reform  abuses  and  corruptions,  but  they  at 
the  same  time  avowed  their  willingness  to  submit,  in 
all  matters  affecting  the  peace  and  unity  of  the  Church, 
to  the  decision  of  the  Catholic  or  Universal  Churcb 
expressed  by  a  free  general  council.  They  alleged,  how- 
ever, what  is  undoubtedly  true,  that  for  several  hun- 
dred years  there  had  been  no  really  universal  council ; 
that  in  the  then  state  of  Christendom  such  a  council 
was  impracticable ;  that  there  was  no  j)ower  of  compe- 
tent jurisdiction  to  convoke  it ;  and  that  the  abuses 
and  corruptions  of  the  day  were  too  flagrant  for  their 
reformation  to  be  longer  postponed.  Under  these  cir- 
cumstances, tbey  considered  that  tlie  only  way  in  which, 
wliile  reforming  abuses,  they  could  testify  their  sub- 
mission to  the  Catholic  Church,  was  to  23roceed  by  the 
rule  which.  I  have  mentioned,  viz :  the  Word  of  God, 
as  interpreted  by  catliolic  tradition ;  tliat  is,  by  a 
continual  succession  of  witnesses  up  to  the  time  of  the 
A2X)stles. 

^j  this  rule  the  Church  of  England  consented  to  be 
tried ;  and  while  adhering  to  this  rule,  it  is  manifest 
that  she  could  not  depart  from  the  Aj)ostolic  Succes- 
sion in  doctrine.      The  face  of  the  Church,  indeed,  be- 


fore  and  after  this  reformation  of  abuses,  was  different ; 
and  lience  tlie  crafty  sophist  or  the  suj^eriicial  observer 
is  ready  to  exclaim  :  "  You  have  a  new  Church  ;  you 
do  not  adore  in  the  Eucharist  that  which  the  priest 
lifts  up  in  his  hands  before  the  people  ;  you  do  not  re- 
quire auricular  confession ;  you  do  not  worship  images  ; 
you  have  no  masses  for  bringing  souls  out  of  pur- 
gatory ;  you  administer  the  Eucharist  in  both  kinds. 
Surely,  whether  these  things  are  right  or  wrong,  you 
cannot  pretend  to  be  the  same  Church  you  were  be- 
fore ;  you  have  departed  from  the  succession  of  doc- 
trine." To  which  the  simple  answer  is,  that  these  and 
all  like  matters  contained  in  the  new  creed  of  the 
Church  of  Kome  are  either  beside  or  contrary  to  the 
Word  of  God,  as  interpreted  by  catholic  tradition  and 
the  truly  oecumenical  councils.  In  other  words,  they 
are  either  beside  or  contrary  to  the  Faith  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  are  therefore  no  proof  that  we 
have  not  succeeded  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Apostles.* 
On  the  death  of  Edward  VI.,  and  the  accession  of 

"  *  To  their  usual  question,  then,  '  Where  was  the  Protestant  Church  or  Re- 
ligion before  Luther  1'  I  answer,  first,  That  it  was  there,  where  their  whole  re- 
ligion cannot,  aS'  they  grant,  be  found,  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Secondly,  it  was, 
as  Bishop  Usher  saith  well,  where  their  Church  was,  in  the  same  Place,  though 
not  in  the  same  State  and  Condition.  The  Reformation,  or  Protestantism,  did 
not  make  a  new  Faith  or  Church,  but  reduced  things  to  the  primitive  purity ; 
plucked  not  up  the  good  seed,  the  Catholic  Faith  or  true  worship,  but  the  after- 
sown  tares  of  error,  as  image  worship,  purgatory,  &c.,  which  were  ready  to 
choke  it.  Did  the  Reformation  in  Hezekiah  or  Josiah's  days  set  up  a  new 
Church  or  religion  different  in  essence  from  the  old  onel  Had  it  not  been  a 
ridiculous  impertinency  for  one  that  knew  Naaman  before,  while  he  stood  by,  to 
ask,  where  is  Naaman  1  And  being  answered,  this  is  he,  for  the  inquirer,  to 
reply,  it  cannot  be  he,  for  Naaman  was  a  leper — this  man  is  clean.  AVaS  not 
Naaman,  formerly  a  leper  and  now  cleansed,  the  same  person  1  A  field  of  wheat 
in  part  weeded  is  the  same  it  was  as  to  ground  and  seed,  not  another.  In  like 
manner,  the  true  visible  Christian  Church,  cleansed  and  unclean,  reformed  and 
unreformed,  is  the  same  Church  altered,  not  as  to  essence  or  substance,  but 
quality  or  condition." — Mr.  Samuel  Gardiner,  one  of  the  writers  in  Gibson's 
Collection  of  Tracts. 


Queen  Mary  to  tlie  throne  of  England,  tlie  affairs  of 
the  Churcli  ceased  for  a  time  to  be  conducted  by  the 
archbishops  and  bishops  of  the  English  Church,  and 
were  managed  by  the  authority  of  the  Pope  and  of  the 
five  or  six  bishops  who  had  been  displaced  in  the  pre- 
vious reign. 

The  PojDe  of  Eome,  we  contend,  had  no  jurisdiction 
in  the  English  Church  except  by  the  consent  of  the 
English  Church,  and  consequently  the  acts  and  regula- 
tions of  the  Pope,  in  concurrence  with  the  few  bishops 
who  had  been  deposed  by  their  lawful  superiors,  had 
no  canonical  force,  but  were  utterly  null  and  void. 
Aided,  however,  by  the  temj^oral  power,  these  foreign 
intruders  expelled  the  majority  of  the  lawful  bishops 
and  substituted  others  in  their  place.  Nor  was  this 
all ;  but,  having  procured  the  re-enactment  of  statutes 
(which  had  been  humanely  repealed  in  the  two  preced- 
ing reigns)  for  the  punishment  of  heretics  by  death, 
they  had  the  effrontery  and  the  cruelty  to  burn  as 
heretics  men  who  were  better  Catholics  than  them- 
selves, and  whom  they  were  bound,  by  the  canons,  to 
reverence  as  the  lawful  bishops  and  spiritual  fathers  of 
the  Church.  "  Come,"  they  said,  "  these  are  the  heirs  ; 
let  us  kill  them,  and  the  inheritance  shall  be  ours." 

But  it  pleased  God  to  bafBe  their  designs.  The 
reign  of  Mary,  though  violent,  was  of  short  duration ; 
and  on  the  accession  of  Elizabeth,  the  bishops  of  Queen 
Mary's  days  either  withdrew  or  were  deprived  of  their 
Sees.     One  only  was  suffered  to  conform.'^     They  were 

*The  bishop  who  conformed,  was  Anthony  Kitchen,  who  had  been  a  sort  of 
Vicar  of  Bray,  taking  care,  in  all  the  changes,  to  keep  in  favor  with  the  domi- 
nant party.  The  other  bishops,  who  either  resigned  or  were  deprived  (some 
fourteen  or  fifteen  in  number),  were  schismatics,  inasmuch  as  they  had  either  come 
into  the  places  of  lawful  bishops  during  the  life  of  the  latter,  or  had  received 
consecration  from,  or  held  communion  with,  bishops  who  had  been  thus  schis- 


10 

not  tlie  lawful  bishops  of  tlie  Cliurcli  of  England,  but 
had  held  their  places  by  \aolence  and  usurpation  under 
a  foreign  jurisdiction.  Besides,  they  had  shed  inno- 
cent blood ;  they  were  believed,  on  good  grounds,  to 
hold  doctrines  subversive  of  the  government  in  the 
State,  and  they  upheld  some  of  the  most  flagrant  abuses 
and  corruptions  in  the  Church.  There  was,  therefore,  no 
reason,  either  of  justice  or  expediency,  for  allowing  them 
to  remain.  In  the  Providence  of  God,  five  of  the  law- 
ful bishops  of  the  Church  under  Edward  VI.,  were  still 
alive.  These  were  now  recalled,  and  all  but  one  united 
in  settlino;  the  Church  in  that  reformed  state  which  had 
been  so  rudely  and  unlav/fully  assailed.  By  these  the 
succession  of  bishops  was  preserved,  and  has  ever  since 
been  regularly  continued ;  so  that  the  authority  of  the 
bishops  who  have  succeeded  to  them,  both  in  respect  of 
orders  and  jurisdiction,  is  beyond  reasonable  question. 

On  a  review  of  these  facts,  two  or  three  remarks  may 
be  thought  worthy  of  attention : 

It  has  become  common  of  late  to  extenuate  the  cru- 
elties exercised  towards  the  Reformed  Bishops  in  Queen 

matically  intruded.  I  am  not  aware  that  they  themselves  pleaded  principle  as 
their  reason  for  withdrawal ;  and  if  they  had,  the  plea,  considering  their  antece- 
dents, would  have  carried  but  little  weight.  Burnet  and  Bramhall  say  expressly, 
that  they  hoped,  by  acting  in  concert,  to  intimidate  the  Queen.  I  add,  in  the 
words  of  Dr.  Saywell,  "  they  usurped  their  places  by  turning  out  the  metropoli- 
tans, and  a  major  part  of  the  bishops  of  each  province,  and  so  could  have  no  law- 
ful authority  or  jurisdiction.  Queen  Elizabeth  therefore  set  them  aside,  and  so 
removed  this  violence  and  usurpation  ;  and  being  willing  to  restore  all  things  as 
they  were  settled  in  King  Edward's  reign,  she  calls  back  the  bishops  that  were 
still  alive,  which  were  only  five  in  number ;  Bishops  Barlow,  Scory,  Coverdale, 
Kitchin  and  Thirlby,  and  all  but  Thirlby  concurred  in  settling  the  Reformation. 
So  we  had  still  the  major  part  of  the  lawful  bishops  to  renew  the  succession  ; 
and  they  did  ordain  Archbishop  Parker,  and  others,  and  it  has  been  regularly  con- 
tinued ever  since.  Thus  the  authority  of  our  present  bishops  as  to  order,  is  be- 
yond dispute."  (See  Dr.  Saywell's  "Reformation  of  the  Church  of  England, 
justified  according  to  the  canons  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  and  other  general  coun- 
cils, and  the  tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church."     Cambridge,  A.  D.  1688.) 


11 

Mary's  reign,  by  attributing  tliem  to  the  temper  of 
the  age,  which,  as  is  pretended,  infected  all  parties 
alike,  and  incited  each  that  was  in  the  ascendency  to 
persecute  its  opponents.  But  what  are  the  facts  in  this 
case  ?  That  the  chief  of  the  Reformed  Bishops  were 
burnt  at  the  stake  as  heretics  is  certain ;"  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  is  equally  certain  that,  when  the  reform- 
ed party,  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  obtained  the  ascen- 
dency, the  Roman  bishops  Avere  treated  in  a  very 
different  manner.  They  were,  it  is  true,  and  for  good 
reason,  dispossessed  of  their  Sees,  to  which  they  had  no 
just  title ;  but  not  one  of  them  was  treated  with  sever- 
ity in  consequence  of  anything  done  in  the  previous 
reiofn.  Most  of  them  were  suffered  to  live  with  their 
friends ;  two  of  them  spent  the  remainder  of  their  days 
under  the  roof  of  Archbishop  Parker,  and  one  of  them 
was  honorably  buried  by  him  at  his  death.  Let  us  not 
extenuate  the  conduct  of  the  one  party  at  the  expense 
of  the  other ;  especially  when  it  is  also  at  the  expense 
of  truth  and  justice.f 

Attempts,  indeed,  are  often  made  to  excite  odium 
against  the  Reformed  Church  of  England,  and  sympa- 
thy in  behalf  of  her  Papal  opponents,  in  consequence 
of  a  series  of  events  which  began  soon  after  to  be  un- 
folded. But  when  these  facts  are  placed  in  their  true 
light,  the  character  of  the  English  Church,  for  mode- 
ration and  charity,  will  not  suffer.  In  the  first  part  of 
the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  the  kingdom  almost  universally 
acquiesced  in  the  Reformation.     The  deprived  bishops 

"This  was  bad  enough  ;  but  what  aggravated  the  atrocity  of  the  proceeding  is, 
that  the  statute  under  which  they  were  convicted,  and  condemned  to  the  stake, 
and  which  had  been  abrogated  by  25  Henry  VIII.,  Cap.  14,  and  again  by  1 
Edward  VI.,  Cap.  3,  was  revived  and  re-enacted  under  Mary,  as  if  for  the  very 
purpose  of  applying  it  to  the  Reformers.  For  a  fuller  view  of  this  topic  the 
reader  is  referred  to  Appendix  G. 

t  For  the  grounds  on  which  these  statements  are  made,  see  Appendix  H. 


12 

formed  no  party  against  it,  and  tlie  clergy  of  tlie 
Cliurcli,  witli  a  remarkable  unanimity,  came  into  tlie  use 
of  the  Reformed  Liturgy.  In  the  eleventh  year  of  that 
reign,  however,  the  then  Pope  of  Rome  (Pius  V.),  find- 
ing the  attempts  of  his  predecessor  (Pius  IV.)  to  recov- 
er the  kingdom  by  arts  and  persuasion  fruitless,*  issued 
his  bull  of  excommunication  and  deposition  against  the 
Queen,  absolving  all  her  subjects  from  their  oaths  of 
allegiance.f  This  it  was,  which  gave  an  entirely  new 
aspect  to  the  controversy,  and  led  to  all  the  subsequent 
troubles.  That  the  Pope  of  Rome  should  send  mis- 
sionaries into  England  in  opposition  to  the  lawful  bish- 
ops of  that  Church,  was  indeed  a  violation  of  the 
ancient  canons,  but  not  an  offence  which  should  have 
been  visited  by  temporal  penalties ;  but  to  send  his  emis- 
saries into  England  to  preach  sedition  and  rebellion  to 
the  people,  was  an  ofience  against  the  State ;  and,  if 
the  State  saw  fit  to  punish  such  offences  with  rigor, 
there  is  no  reason  to  blame  the  Church  ;  nor,  even  if 
we  should  approve  of  some  of  the  political  sentiments 
of  the  offenders,  are  we  bound  to  sympathize  with  them 
as  "  missionary  priests"  and  ministers  of  Christ,  while 
they  abuse  their  office  to  the  purposes  of  political  fac- 
tion. For,  even  if  such  men  have  been  unjustly  con- 
demned for  treason  to  the  State,  this  is  no  proof  that 
they  were  martyrs  for  Christ. 

It  is  difficult  to  review  the  extraordinary  events  by 
which  the  Church  of  England  has  been  enabled  to 
maintain  and  vindicate  her  title  to  the  Apostolic  suc- 
cession, both  in  orders  and  doctrine,  without  believing 
that  she  is  yet  to  answer  some  great  ends  in  the  design 
of  Divine  Providence.    The  intelligent  and  consistent 

*  See  Appendix  I. 

t  See  the  next  Sermon,  and  Appendix  L- 


13 

members  of  tliis  Clmrcli  liave  ever  been  most  firmly  per- 
suaded that  lier  succession,  both  of  right  and  of  fact,  to 
the  orders  and  faith  of  the  A^^ostles,  is  the  ground  on 
which  the  errors  of  the  Roman  Church  may  be  most 
successfully  combated.  All  other  opposition,  however 
noisy  and  boastful,  begins  with  a  virtual  surrender,  and 
must  necessarily  end  in  defeat.  For,  when  the  question 
is  as  to  identity  with  a  society  and  doctrine  which  be- 
gan more  than  eighteen  centuries  ago,  what  is  it  but  a 
surrender  to  renounce,  in  the  very  outset,  all  pretence 
of  succession  to  the  founders  of  that  society,  and  the 
original  propagators  of  that  doctrine  ?  The  Church 
of  Rome  knows  this,  and  knows  the  immense  advan- 
tage which  the  Protestant  cause  would  derive  from  a 
valid  claim  to  the  Aj)ostolic  succession.  Hence,  there 
is  no  fact  which  her  emissaries  have  more  strenuously 
denied,  or  resorted  to  more  unworthy  arts  to  obscure, 
than  the  validity  of  the  Anglican  orders.  And  it  is 
matter  of  wonder  and  regret  that  Protestants  general- 
ly, including  many  estimable  members  of  our  own  com- 
munion, should  consent  to  further  her  interests  by 
affecting  to  treat  the  subject  with  ridicule ;  or  to  repre- 
sent us  as  in  covert  alliance  with  the  Church  of  Rome, 
because  we  refuse  to  abandon  the  only  solid  ground  on 
which  her  errors  may  be  met  and  refuted. 

During  the  past  week,  we  have  daily  offered  the 
prayer  that  Almighty  God,  our  Heavenly  Father,  who 
hath  purchased  to  himself  an  universal  church,  by  the 
precious  blood  of  his  dear  Son,  would  mercifully  look 
upon  the  same,  and  that  he  would  at  this  time  so  guide 
and  govern  the  minds  of  His  servants,  the  bishops  and 
pastors  of  His  flock,  that  they  may  lay  hands  suddenly 
on  no  man,  but  faithfully  and  wisely  make  choice  of  fit 
persons  to  serve  in  the  sacred  ministry  of  His  Church ; 


14 


that  He  would  give  His  grace  and  heavenly  benediction 
to  all  those  who  are  ordained  to  any  holy  function ; 
that  he  would  replenish  them  with  the  truth  of  His  doc- 
trine, and  endue  them  with  innocency  of  life,  that  they 
may  faithfully  serve  before  Him,  to  the  glory  of  His 
great  name,  and  the  benefit  of  His  holy  Church.  It  is 
impossible  to  offer  this  prayer,  and  not  to  connect  with 
it  the  ardent  desire  that  suspicions  and  jealousies  may 
be  removed,  and  heats  and  contentions  allayed,  so  that 
all  who  profess  and  call  themselves  Christians  may  be 
united  in  a  peaceful  and  charitable  temper.  In  this 
way  only  can  we  promote  the  advancement  of  religion 
and  the  salvation  of  mankind  ;  and  let  those  who  sin- 
cerely desire  this  end,  consider  that  the  way  to  pro- 
mote the  glory  of  God,  and  the  peace  and  unity  of  His 
Church,  is  not  to  impose  the  private  opinions  of  Roman 
schoolmen,  nor  the  extravagant  devices  of  modern  re- 
formers, but  to  maintain  the  truly  ancient  and  Apostolic 
faith,  devotion  and  discipline,  delivered  and  recom- 
mended by  the  Word  of  God,  and  the  example  of  the 
Primitive  and  Catholic  Church. 


THE 


CiJiithmiti  0f  tlje  C|iirc|  of  Ornijlaiil 


DISCOUESE    II 


Hebrews  xiii.,  17. 


"  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,  and  submit  yourselves  ;  for  they 
watch  for  your  souls,  as  they  that  must  give  account." 

The  rlglit  to  govern,  to  wliicL  the  duty  of  obedience 
is  correlative,  is  not  here  rested  on  the  possession  of 
extraordinary  and  miraculous  powers,  such  as  were 
necessary  to  the  first  settlement  of  the  Christian  Church 
in  the  world,  but  on  the  possession  of  those  standing 
and  ordinary  powers  which  are  necessary  to  the  pre- 
servation of  the  Christian  Church,  in  all  ao*es,  as  an 
orderly  society.  Obey  them  who  "  have  the  rule  over 
you,"  who  "  watch  for  your  souls ;"  and  who,  having 
received  this  trust  from  the  Divine  Head  of  the  Church, 
either  immediately  (as  ^did  the  Apostles)  or  at  the 
hands  of  those  whom  He  has  commissioned  to  convey 
it,  must  at  last  "  account"  to  him  for  the  discharge  of 
it.  Hence  the  inspired  precept  is  one,  not  of  partial 
and  temporary,  but  of  universal  and  perpetual  obliga- 
tion in  the  Christian  Church ;  and  evidently  supposes 
a  succession  of  officers  in  it,  to  whom  its  members  are 
always  and  everywhere  bound  to  submit  themselves  in 
all  matters  which  they  enjoin  out  of  the  Word  of  God, 
or  agreeably  to  the  same,  for  the  conservation  of  its 
peace  and  unity.     "  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over 


16 

you,  and  submit  yourselves ;  for  tliey  watch  for  your 
souls,  as  they  that  must  give  account." 

Accordingly,  it  hath  been  the  constant  belief  of  the 
Church  that  our  Lord  j^rovided  from  the  beginning  for 
the  maintenance  of  a  continual  and  orderly  succession 
of  pastors ;  that  He  sent  His  Apostles  as  His  Father 
had  sent  Him  ;  that  is,  with  authority  to  send  others 
in  His  name,  the  power  of  ^propagating  itself  being  an 
element  of  the  original  commission ;  and  consequently, 
that  the  spiritual  rulers  whom  we  are  bound  to  obey, 
are  not  such  as  have  taken  the  office  of  the  Christian 
ministry  on  themselves,  or  derived  it  from  the  people, 
but  such  as  have  received  both  the  faith  and  doctrine 
of  Christ,  and  the  authority  to  administer  His  sacra- 
ments, by  an  uninterrupted  succession  from  the  Holy 
Apostles,  and  hold  the  same  as  a  most  precious  trust 
or  deposit,  for  the  custody  and  conveyance  of  which 
they  are  responsible  to  God.  Hence,  when  we  are  ac- 
costed with  the  ensnaring  question  which  is  put  to 
Protestants  by  the  emissaries  of  the  court  of  Rome, 
"  Who  were  the  ministers  of  God  that  gathered  that 
society  of  men  with  whom  you  are  now  united  ?"  we 
answer,  directly  to  the  point :  The  society  with  which 
we  are  now  united  has  been  propagated  from  the 
Church  of  England,  and  the  Church  of  England  has 
been  propagated  by  an  un1)roken  succession  of  pastors 
and  doctrine  from  the  Apostles  of  our  Lord  and  Sa- 
viour Jesus  Cueist. 

The  only  objection  of  any  moment  which  is  made  in 
rejoinder,  is  drawn  from  the  changes  which  took  place 
in  the  state  of  the  English  Church  at  the  time  of  its 
reformation  from  Popery.  In  a  previous  discourse  I 
reviewed  those  events,  and  assigned  some  of  our  rea- 
sons for  believing  that  the  Apostolic  Succession,  both 


17 

in  orders  and  doctrine,  was,  by  tlie  good  Providence 
of  God,  continued  during  tliose  troublous  times. 

From  this  review  it  appears,  I  apprehend,  that  the 
Church  of  England  at  that  time  separated  from  no 
other   body   or   society   of  Christians.      She   simply 
affirmed  that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
in  England  was  founded  on  no  divine  warrant ;  that 
it  had  been  the  result  of  encroachments  on  the  one 
side,  and  concessions  on  the  other ;  that  it  had  been 
proved,  after  a  long  and  full  trial,  to  be  burdensome 
to  the  people,  and  operative  of  manifold  evils  ;  that  it 
had  been  endured  long  enough,  and  ought  to  be  at 
once  and  forever  declined.     The  separation,  if  such  it 
were,  was  from  the  court  of  Rome,  in  respect  to  its 
claim  of  jurisdiction  in  England,  and  not  from  the 
Church  of  Rome  in  respect  to  any  points  of  faith  or 
order  that  had  been  ruled  by  the  Catholic  Church. 
Leaving  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  govern  the  Church  of 
Rome,  and  the  Churches  also  of  such  other  countries 
as  deemed  it  for  their  benefit  to  continue  subject  to 
his  jurisdiction,   the   Church   of  England,  under  the 
protection  of  the  State,  resumed  the  responsibility  of 
governing  herself  and  her  own  members,  agreeably  to 
the  Word  of  God  and  Catholic  tradition.     She  re- 
modeled her  ritual,  translated  her  prayers  and  offices 
from  a  dead  to  a  living  language,  and  made  such  other 
changes  as  she  judged  needful  to  meet  and  to  guide 
the  awakening  spirit  and  intelligence  of  the  age.     No 
change,  however,  was  made  which  shocked  the  feel- 
ings, or  offended  the  consciences  of  her  members,  as 
may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that,  of  the  9,400  clergy 
of  the   realm,   only   177   refused   to   take   the   oath 
acknowledging  the  supremacy  of  the  Queen,  •  which 
was  not  administered   until  after  the  changes  were 

2 


18 

made.*  Nor  is  this  to  be  wondered  at,  for  tlae  reform- 
ation from  popery  liad  been  gradual ;  the  minds  of  the 
people  were  prepared  for  each  successive  step ;  and 
when  the  reformation  was  completed,  the  Church  of 
England  remained  the  same  Church  as  before  ;  having 
departed  from  no  rule  of  Apostolic  order,  nor  relin- 
quished any  one  point  of  the  Catholic  faith ;  having 
separated  herself  from  no  other  Church,  nor  separated 
any  other  from  herself;  and  having  continued  to  re- 
tain in  her  bosom  the  great  body  of  her  clergy  and 
people. 

For  the  space  of  eleven  or  twelve  years  after  these 
changes  were  made,  the  Romanists,  as  a  sect  distinct 
from  the  Church  of  England,  had  no  existence.  The 
Christian  people  of  that  country  continued,  after  the 
reformation  as  before,  to  attend  their  parish  churches, 
and  to  be  in  communion  with  their  lawful  pastors : 
and  the  attendance  was  voluntary ;  the  penal  stat- 
utes which  afterwards  subjected  the  Church  to  so 
much  obloquy  having  not  then  been  enacted,  and  the 
people  being  constrained  to  attend  the  authorized  ser- 
vice under  no  severer  compulsion  than  one  which  was 
intended  as  a  check  on  idle  and  vagrant  persons,  and 
imposed  a  fine  of  one  shilling  (to  be  collected  and 
given  to  the  poor)  for  absence  from  church  on  the 
Lord's  day.     Even  they  who  had  been  at  first  opposed 

*  "  The  Parliament  being  dissolved,  by  authority  of  the  same  the  Liturgy  wa9 
forthwith  brought  into  the  Churches  in  the  vulgar  tongue  ;  images  were  removed 
without  tumult ;  the  oath  of  supremacy  offered  to  the  Popish  bishops  and  others 
of  the  Ecclesiastical  profession,  which  most  of  them  had  sworn  unto  in  the  reign 
of  Henry  the  Eighth.  As  many  of  them  as  refused  to  swear  were  turned  out  of 
their  livings,  dignities,  and  bishopricks  ;  and  those  (as  themselves  have  written) 
in  the  whole  Realm,  which  reckoneth  more  than  9,400  Ecclesiastical  promotions, 
not  above  80  parsons  of  churches,  50  prebendaries,  15  presidents  of  colleges, 
12  archdeacons,  as  many  deans,  6  abbots  and  abbesses,  and  14  bishops,  being  all 
which  sate,  saving  onely  Antony,  Bishop  of  Llandaff,  the  calamity  of  his  See." — 
Camden  Hist,  of  Eliz.  p.  28. 


19 

to  tlie  changes,  united,  at  least  outwardly,  ^dth  tlie 
Reformed  Church  in  prayer  and  sacraments;*  and 
there  was  a  fair  prospect  that  the  pious  care  of  the 
Church  for  the  better  instruction  and  reformation  of 
her  members,  would  be  requited  by  their  loyal  attach- 
ment and  steadfast  devotion,  and  that  the  Catholic 
faith  would  be  kept  by  all  in  the  unity  of  the  spirit 
and  the  bond  of  peace. 

What  was  it,  then,  that  first  resisted  and  obstructed 
this  movement  of  the  Church  of  England  for  the  im- 
provement and  edification  of  her  peo2:)le  ?  What  was 
it  that  first  separated  a  portion  of  the  members  of 
that  Church  from  her  fold,  formed  them  into  a  new 
sect,  in  opposition  to  their  lawful  pastors,  and  led  to 
the  erection  of  altar  against  altar,  and  communion 
against  communion?  The  distinct  answer  to  these 
questions  is,  that,  in  the  year  1569,  the  then  bishop  of 
Rome  issued  a  proclamation,  in  which,  after  j^remising 
that  he,  as  the  successor  of  St.  Peter,  was  made  by  the 
Most  High  "  Prince  over  all  people  and  all  kingdoms, 

*  "  And  the  Queen,  the  nobility,  the  gentry,  the  clergy,  and  the  main  body  of 
the  nation,  were  so  well  satisfied  of  the  unlawful  authority  of  those  Inshops  that 
were  set  aside,  and  the  undoubted  right  of  those  who  ordained  Archbishop  Parker, 
that  of  about  9,400  clergy,  above  9,200  did,  with  great  joy,  receive  the  bishops- 
and  the  reformation,  and  the  rest  of  the  nation,  even  those  that  were  formerly  zeal- 
ous for  the  Church  of  Rome,  did  join  with  them  in  prayers  and  sacraments,  and  there 
was  an  universal  agreement  and  concurrence  in  the  commencement  of  the  Church 
of  England  for  ten  or  eleven  years  together,  so  that  there  was  no  other  penal  law  but 
that  of  I2d.  a  Sunday,  to  stir  up  lazy  people  to  mind  their  duty ;  and  we  might  have 
continued  so  till  this  day  in  that  happy  concord,  had  not  the  Pope  excommuni- 
cated and  deposed  the  Queen,  and  prohibited  all  her  subjects,  under  pain  of  an 
anathema,  to  own  her  sovereignty,  and  submit  to  the  Bishops  of  the  Church  of 
England.  Upon  which  many  separated  from  our  communion,  and  have  disturbed 
our  government  ever  since  ;  so  that  it  is  plain  the  schism  is  on  the  side  of  the 
Papists,  who,  upon  pretence  of  Papal  authority,  did  withdraw  themselves  from 
the  communion  of  their  own  bishops,  and  make  a  formal  division  in  the  Church, 
which  was  before  united  in  peace  and  truth." — Dr.  Saywell,  A.D.,  1688.  See,, 
also,  Appendix  I. 


20 

to  pluck  up,  destroy,  scatter,  consume,  plant  and  build," 
lie  proceeds  to  excommunicate  the  Queen  of  England 
and  all  lier  adherents,  adding :  "  We  moreover  do  de- 
clare her  to  be  deprived  of  her  pretended  title  to  the 
kingdom  aforesaid,  and  of  all  dominion,  dignity  and 
privilege  whatsoever;  and  also  the  nobility,  subjects 
and  people  of  the  said  kingdom,  and  all  others  who 
have  in  aijy  sort  sworn  unto  her,  to  be  forever  absolv- 
ed from  any  such  oath,  and  all  manner  of  duty,  of 
dominion,  allegiance  and  obedience  ;  and  we  do  also, 
by  authority  of  these  presents,  absolve  them,  and  do 
deprive  the  said  Elizabeth  of  her  pretended  title  to 
the  kingdom,  and  all  other  things  before  named.  And 
we  do  command  and  charge  all  and  every,  the  noble- 
men, subjects,  people  and  others  aforesaid,  that  they 
presume  not  to  obey  her,  or  her  orders,  mandates  and 
laws ;  and  those  which  shall  do  the  contrary,  we  do 
include  them  in  the  like  sentence  of  anathema."* 

Under  the  authority  of  this  bull  the  emissaries  of 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  came  into  England  and  labored 
for  the  accomplishment  of  these  two  ends :  1.  To  se- 
duce the  j)eople  of  England  from  allegiance  to  their 
lawful  sovereign;  and  2.  To  draw  them  away  from 
the  Church  of  England,  and  to  form  them  into  sepa- 
rate congregations  for  the  celebration  of  divine  service, 
according  to  the  Roman  use.  In  the  former  object 
they  failed,  though  not  until  after  a  long  and  obstinate 
struggle,  in  which  the  government  was  compelled,  for 
its  own  preservation,  to  resort  to  measures  of  great 
severity  for  their  supj^ression.t  In  the  latter  object 
they  were  partially  successfuL  They  seduced  many  of 
the  disaffected   members  of  the  Church  of  England 

*  See  the  Bull  of  Pius  V.,  Appendix  K. 
t  See  Appendix  L. 


21 

from  tlie  eommumon  of  their  lawful  pastors,  and 
formed  tliem  into  separate  congregations,  whicli  soon 
■came  to  be  governed  by  what  are  called  titular  bish- 
ops, i.  e.,  bishops  who  did  not  fill  the  ancient  sees  of 
the  realm ;  who  were  not  consecrated  according^  to 
the  ancient  canons  by  the  archbishop  and  bishops  of 
the  province  to  which  they  belonged;  who,  in  fact, 
had  no  dioceses,  but  exercised  their  functions  in  En- 
gland on  fictitious  titles,  and  in  \"irtue  of  no  other  au- 
thority than*that  which  was  founded  on  the  exploded 
right  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  jurisdiction  in  England ; 
that  is,  in  virtue  of  no  di\dne  authority  at  all.  From 
that  time  to  the  present,  the  two  parties  have  continued 
to  hold,  each  towards  the  other,  much  the  same  rela- 
tive position.  On  the  one  side,  the  ancient  church  with 
its  bishops  in  the  ancient  dioceses,  deriving  their  mere- 
ly spiritual  authority,  as  successors  of  the  Apostles, 
from  Christ,  and  with  its  ritual  reformed  from  popery 
and  restored  to  the  simplicity  of  the  primitive  age ; 
and,  on  the  other  side,  the  new  seceders  gathered 
around  leaders  who  have  been  obtruded  on  the  coun- 
try by  a  foreign  power,  whose  orders  are  vitiated  by 
their  notorious  disregard  to  ancient  canons,  whose  ju- 
risdiction is  null  and  void,  from  the  fact  of  its  being 
exercised  in  opposition  to  the  lawful  bishops  of  the 
■country ;  (those  bishops,  I  mean,  to  whom  they  are 
bound  to  be  subject  by  the  law  of  Christ  and  the 
canons  of  the  Catholic  Church,  for  I  throw  out  of  con- 
sideration the  laws  of  the  land ;)  and  who  are  identi- 
fied with  the  Church  of  England  in  the  Catholic  faith 
which  she  has  retained,  and  distinguished  from  her 
only  by  an  adherence  to  the  popery  which  she  has 
rejected. 

Now,  in  regard  to  this  separation,  I  remark — 


22 

1.  Til  at  it  was  unnecessary.  Tlieir  Clinrcli,  tlie 
Cliurcli  of  England,  had  provided  for  tliem  a  Liturgy^ 
whicli,  if  not  unexceptionable,  at  least  contained  all 
things  necessary  to  salvation.  She  had  preserved  for 
them  entire  the  faith  into  which  they  had  been  bap- 
tized, as  it  had  been  professed  and  defined  in  the  four 
universal  councils  (which  Pope  Gregory  the  Great 
used  to  revere  as  the  four  gospels):  the  councils  of 
Nice  and  Constantinople,  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon. 
She  had  distinguished,  as  was  meet,  the  t^fo  sacraments 
of  the  gospel — Baptism  and  the  Holy  Eucharist — 
and  provided  for  their  most  solemn  celebration ;  ac- 
cording to  them  that  pre-eminence  in  which  they 
have  been  always  and  everywhere  held  in  the  Chris- 
tian Church.  She  had  provided,  also,  decent  and 
edifying  forms  for  the  administration  of  those  other 
five  institutions,  which  are  less  properly  called  sacra- 
ments, viz. :  orders,  absolution,  confirmation,  matri- 
mony, and  the  visitation  of  the  sick  and  dying.  She 
appealed  then,  as  she  does  now,  for  her  justification  to 
the  Word  of  God  and  Catholic  tradition;  having  reject- 
ed only  those  things  which  were  either  unknown  to  the 
Catholic  Church  of  the  first  three  or  four  centuries,  or 
which  had  not  been  ruled,  by  the  universal  councils  just 
mentioned,  as  of  necessity  to  salvation.  What  sufficed  for 
salvation  then  must  suffice  now  and  always,  to  the  end  of 
time.  All  this  the  Church  of  England  had  provided ;  the 
only  faults  which  can,  without  captiousness,  be  found 
with  her  services,  are  faults  of  omission  in  things  not 
necessary  ;  faults  which,  if  real,  are  far  more  tolerable 
than  the  crusts  and  overlayings  which  she  had  removed ; 
such,  for  example,  as  the  incorporation  of  notorious 
fables  into  her  ritual.*   The  Church  of  England,  there- 

*  See  Appendix  M. 


23 

fore,  liad  given  lier  members  no  just  occasion  for  sepa- 
ration, and  hence  the  separation  was  unnecessary. 

2.  That  the  separation  was  wilful ;  by  which  I  mean 
that  it  was  an  unwarranted  exercise  of  private  judg- 
ment in  opposition  to  lawful  authority.     The  changes 
that  were  made  did  not  extend  to  points  that  had  been 
ruled  by  the  Catholic  Church  ;  that  is  to  say,  by  the 
four  universal  councils  which  were  held  before  the  ex- 
ternal communion  of  the  Church  was  interrupted.   All 
matters  of  this  nature  were  considered  as  settled.   The 
changes  that  were  made  related  only  to  matters  that 
were  controverted  ;  and  these  were  made  in  an  orderly 
and  synodical  way  by  the   authorized  guides  of  the 
national  church.     For  her  justification  in  this  course, 
the  Church  of  England  may  plead  the  voice  of  reason, 
the  command  of  Scripture,  and  the  precedents  of  an- 
tiquity.    Reason  teaches  us  that  in  every  society  there 
must  be  authority  to  decide  controversies  among  its 
members.     Christ   our   Saviour  has   constituted   this 
authority  in  His  church,  and  commanded  us  to  obey  it. 
The   universal   councils  of  Nice  and  Constantinople, 
Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  acted  on  this  principle  in  de- 
fining the  faith  in  opposition  to  the  Arian  and  Macedo- 
nian  heresies.     "  And  not  only  the  general  councils 
have  exercised  this  authority,  but  particular  churches 
also,  in  national  councils,  in  the  councils  of  Orange, 
Milevis  and  others,  have  used  the  same  power  over 
their  children,  whom  they  were  bound  to  teach  and 
govern,  and  for  whose  souls  they  were  to  account  to 
God  ;  and  they  did  no  more  than  was  their  right,  so 
long  as  they  did   it  with  submission  to  the  general 
church  to  whom  they  were  subject ;  for  Christ  said  to 
the  Apostles,  and  by  them  to  all  the  guides  of  souls 
that  should  succeed  them  in  a  lawful  ordination,  '  He 
that  hears  you,  hears  me,  and  he  that  despises  you,  de- 


24 

spises  me.' — Si.  Oyp.  Ep.  69."*  This  is  wliat  tlie  Clmrcli 
of  England  did  in  those  doctrines  wliicL  were  contro- 
verted at  the  time  of  the  reformation,  and  which  had 
been  determined  by  no  universal  council.  She  de^ 
clared  her  own  sense  in  these  controversies,  and  deter- 
mined which  side  should  be  received  and  professed  for 
truth  by  her  members.  And  to  these  determinations 
her  members  were  bound  to  submit,  not  as  to  infallible 
verities,  but  as  to  probable  truths ;  and  to  rest  in  the 
decisions  of  their  Church  until  it  should  be  made 
plain  by  as  great  or  greater  authority  that  these  de- 
cisions were  erroneous.  Suppose,  then,  and  this  is  the 
most  that  can  be  pretended,  that  the  decisions  of  the 
particular  Church  of  England,  in  the  controversies  of 
that  day,  seemed  to  any  of  her  members  to  be  con- 
trary to  the  doctrine  of  the  universal  church,  still 
they  were  obliged,  on  these  principles — principles 
which  all  Catholics  acknowledge — ^to  silence  and  peace, 
and  not  to  profess  or  to  act  in  opposition  to  the  deter- 
mination of  their  Church ;  and  this  for  the  very  suffi- 
cient reason  that  the  public  profession  of  a  controvert- 
ed dogma  is  not  necessary,  but  the  preservation  of  the 
peace  and  unity  of  the  Church  is.f  But  these  sece- 
ders  set  up  their  own  opinions  on  controverted  doc- 
trines, against  the  determination  of  their  Church ;  and 
they  acted  on  these  opinions  so  as  to  erect  a  rival 
altar  and  a  separate  communion.  Their  separation, 
therefore,  was  wilful  and  factious. 

3.  Had  this  separation  been  made  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  deposed  bishops,  it  might  then  have  had, 
though  no  adequate  sanction,  yet  some  semblance  o<f 

'Bishop  Sparrow,  Preface  to  Collection  of  Articles,  &c.,  of  the  Church  of 
England, 
t  Ibid. 


25 

authority.  But  tlie  chief  of  the  deposed  bishops  kept 
aloof;  and  the  separation  from  the  Church  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  made  under  the  conduct  of  any 
who  either  then  were,  or  ever  had  been,  its  lawful 
bishops.  It  was  made  at  the  instigation  of  a  foreign 
bishop,  or  of  persons  acting  under  his  instructions ;  and 
that  foreign  bishop  the  same  whom  all  (both  the  act- 
ing and  deprived)  bishops  of  England  had  declared, 
almost  with  one  voice,  to  have  no  jurisdiction  in  that 
country ;  but  who,  though  disowned  and  expelled  by 
the  constituted  authorities,  both  of  the  Church  and 
the  State,  still  continued  to  intrude  his  agents  into  the 
country,  that  he  might  make  for  himself  a  party  for 
the  avowed  purpose  of  bringing  the  Church,  and 
through  the  Church  the  State,  under  his  own  rule  and 
dominion.  No  claim,  as  it  seems  to  me,  can  be  wilder, 
than  that  of  a  monarch  at  Rome  to  a  supremacy, 
either  spiritual  or  temporal,  in  England  ;  nor  anything 
more  unnatural  or  uncatholic,  more  wild  and  fanatical, 
than  for  professed  Christians  to  separate  from  the 
Church  of  their  native  country,  and  from  their  lawful 
bishops,  and  to  put  themselves  in  subjection  to  the 
monarch  of  a  foreign  and  distant  land. 

A  separation  thus  unnecessary,  thus  wilful,  thus  ex- 
travagant, has  no  mark,  that  I  can  see,  to  distinguish 
it  from  a  guilty  schism.  The  members  of  the  Church 
of  England,  therefore,  who  at  this  time  separated  from 
her  communion,  became  thereby  schismatics  ;  and  the 
Church  of  Home,  which  caused  and  encouraged  this, 
as  she  has  manifold  other  schisms,  for  her  own  tempo- 
ral aggrandizement,  is  responsible  for  the  schism,  and  in- 
fected with  its  guilt.  It  is  in  vain  for  Romanists  to 
retort  that  the  Church  of  England  had  before  with- 
drawn from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome. 
That  withdrawal  was  the  act  of  their  own  men  ;  and 


26 

if  it  be  scliismatical,  tlien  were  tlie  opponents  and 
persecutors  of  tlie  reformers,  Heath,  Bonner,  Gardiner, 
Tonstall,  Stokesly,  Thirlby,  etc.,  tlie  scliismatics.  In 
vain  do  they  rail  against  the  Church  of  EngL^nd  for 
acknowledging  the' king  as  the  supreme  head;  for 
what  is  meant  by  this  title  (to  pass  by  the  fact  of  its 
having  been  sanctioned  by  their  own  party)  is  not, 
that  the  sovereign  has,  in  his  own  person,  or  that  he 
can  communicate  to  others,  any  part  of  that  power  of 
orders  and  jurisdiction  which  Christ  left  to  his  Church, 
but  only  that  he  has  power  to  see  that  all  subjects,  as 
well  ecclesiastical  as  others,  do  their  duties  in  their 
several  stations,  and  co-operate  in  their  appointed 
functions  for  the  public  good.*  In  vain  do  they  seek 
to  reproach  the  Church  with  having  taken  her  religion 
from  Parliament,  since  all  the  changes  which  were 
made  in  her  services  were  approved  by  the  Church 
herself  in  her  convocations  or  synods,  lefore  they  were 
enacted  in  Parliament.f  These  and  the  like  frivolous 
pretexts  are  of  no  avail  to  exonerate  them  from  the 
charge  of  having  needlessly  and  wilfully  separated 
from  the  Church  of  Eno:land,  and  formed  themselves 
into  congregations  independent  of  her  jurisdiction, 
and  under  a  foreign  power. 

In  this  view  of  the  case  will  be  found  the  explana- 
tion, 1st.,  of  the  name  which  we  apply  to  those  professed 
Christians  who  are  subject  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome ;  and, 
2d.,  of  the  attitude  which  we  hold  towards  them  in 
controverted  questions : 

*  See  Appendix  D. 

+  For  example,  the  question  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was 
submitted,  as  we  have  seen,  to  the  Clergy,  and  resolved  by  them  before  it  was 
made  the  subject  of  statute  in  Parliament.  In  like  manner,  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  the  Ordinal,  and  the  Articles  of  Religion,  were  approved  and 
adopted  by  the  convocation  of  the  Clergy  before  they  were  enjoined  by  Parlia- 
ment.    See  also  Appendix  N. 


27 

1.  The  Cliurcli  of  England  had,  from  her  origin,  been 
accounted  to  be  that  part  of  Christ's  Catholic  Church 
which  existed  in  England.     In  her  reformation  from 
Popery  she  had  religiously  abstained  from  all  innova- 
tions in  the  Catholic   faith,  having  taken  for  her  rule 
the  Word  of  God,  as  interpreted  by  Catholic  tradition. 
She   retained   the   Catholic   creeds,  and   obliged  her 
members,  on  every  occasion  of  public  worship,  to  pro- 
fess their  belief  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church.     It  was 
not,  therefore,  to  be  expected  that  her  faithful  mem- 
bers should  give  the  name  of  Catholics  to  an  aggrega- 
tion of  men  that  seceded  from  her  communion,  and  set 
up  a  rival  worship  within  her  own  jurisdiction.    These 
seceders  were  separatists  and  schismatics ;  and  they, 
therefore,  like  other  sects,  very  naturally  received  a 
name  from  their  distinctive  tenet,  being  called  Koman- 
ists  and  Papists  from  their  adherence  to  the  govern- 
ment and  Pope  of  Eome  in  opposition  to  their  lawful 
bishops.      These    designations    were    not,    therefore, 
originally  bestowed,  nor  have  they  been  since  con- 
tinued, from   any  want   of  Christian   courtesy ;    they 
were  adopted  naturally,  and  on  principle,  and  have 
been  since  continued  among  us  by  a  consistent  regard 
to  our  own  j)osition,  and  a  just  adherence  to  historic 
truth.* 

2.  The  relation  in  which  we  are  placed  to  the 
Eomanists  in  consequence  of  their  separation  from  our 
communion,  A.  D.  1569,  by  order  of  Pius  V.,  deserves 
to  be  borne  in  mind  in  the  discussion  of  questions  con- 
troverted between  us.  For  inasmuch  as  we  were  pas- 
sive, and  the  formal  act  of  separation  was  made  by 
them,  we  are  not  bound  to  show  cause  why  we  remain 
in  the  Church,  but  they  are  bound  to  show  cause  why 

*  See  Appendix  O. 


28 

they  left  it.     The  separation  is  their  concern  and  not 
ours ;  they  are  bound   to  purge  themselves  from  the 
sin  of  schism,  but  we  are  not  bound  to  confute  the 
arguments  by  which  they  seek  to  maintain  and  defend 
their  schism.     It  is  enough  for  us  that  their  arguments 
are  not  directly  conclusive^  and  we  are  not  obliged  to 
listen  to  any  other  arguments  than  such  as  are  directly 
conclusive.     They  are  bound  to  vindicate  and  prove 
the  principle  on  which  they  separated,  and  to  show, 
by  plain  and  invincible  proofs,  that  we  should  adopt 
the  same  j^rinciple ;  and,  if  they  fail  in  this  attempt, 
the  whole  controversy,  in  all  rational  and  christian 
judgment,  is  at  an  end.*     Now  what  is  this  principle  ? 
It  is  not  that  the  particular  propositions  debated  be- 
tween us  are  necessary  as  a  means  of  salvation ;  so  that 
our  ignorance  or  disbelief  of  them  puts  us  out  of  the  way 
of  salvation.     This  is  manifest,  both  from  the  nature  of 
the  propositions  and  from  the  evidence  on  which  they 
rest.     Belief  in  God,  the  Father  Almighty  ;  in  his 
adorable  Son,  Jesus  Cheist  ;  in  His  incarnation,  pas- 
sion and  death ;  in  His  glorious  resurrection  and  ascen- 
sion, and  in  his  second  coming  to  judgment ;  and  belief 
in  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  proceedeth  from  the  Father, 
and  whom  the  Son,  agreeably  to  His  gracious  promise, 
hath  sent  from  the  Father  to  rule  and  comfort  His 
mystical  body,  the  Holy  Catholic  Church ;  to  unite  its 
members,  present  and  departed,  on  earth  and  in  Para- 
dise, in  one  communion  of  Saints ;  to  be  the  principle 
of  a  new  and  heavenly  life  to  their  souls  and  bodies, 
deliverino^  their  souls  from  the  bands  of  sin.  in  this 
world,  and  raising  their  bodies,  in  God's  good  time, 
from  the  corruption  of  the  grave,  and  advancing  the 
whole  man,   body   and  soul,    to  life   everlasting,   in 

*  See  two  Discourses  of  the  learned  Henry  Dodwell  :  Quarto,  London,  A.  D. 
1688. 


29 


the  kingdom  of  glory ;  this  belief,  I  say,  or  belief  in 
the  several  articles  of  the  Apostles'  creed,  is  seen 
at  once  to  be  intrinsically  necessary  to  salvation 
through  Christ ;  so  that  ignorance  or  disbelief  of 
it  puts  a  man  out  of  the  way  of  salvation  through 
Jesus  Christ.  And  the  extrinsic  evidence  of  its 
divine  origin  is  such  that  its  rejection  argues  a  most 
culpable  levity  or  obliquity  of  mind ;  for  the  doctrine 
is  plainly  contained  in  the  original  records  of  our  faith, 
and  is  moreover  attested  by  the  constant  tradition  of 
the  Catholic  Church  in  every  age  and  place  from  the 
beginning. 

Now,  compare  with  these  immutable  verities  of  the 
Christian  faith,  the  points  that  are  controverted  be- 
tween the  Romanists   and  us ;    as,  e.  g. :     That  that 
which  the   priest  (after  the   consecration  of  the  ele- 
ments in  the  Holy  Eucharist)   takes  in  his  hand  and 
holds  up  before  the  people,  is  to  be  adored  with  the 
adoration  due  to  God  ;  that  the  images  of  Christ  and 
the  Virgin  Mary,  and  the  other  saints,  are  to  be  had 
and  kept,  and  duty  of  honor  and  worship  is  to  be 
given  to  them  ;  that  the  state  of  most  souls,  departed 
in  the  faith  of  Christ,  is  a  purgatory ;  that  a  few  others 
(called  saints)  now  reign  together  with  Christ,  and 
that  these  are  to  be  invoked,  and  their  earthly  reUcs 
worshipped;  that  whole  and  entire   Christ,  and  the 
true  sacrament,  are  received  under  one  only  species, 
that  of  bread ;  and,  to  name  no  more,  that  the  defi- 
nitions of  the  council  of  Trent,  all  and  every  one,  con- 
cerning original  sin  and  justification,  are  to  be  firmly 
embraced  and  received.     These  propositions  are  mani- 
festly no  more  than  the  determinations  of  curious  ques- 
tions and  scholastic  disputes ;  so  that,  even  supposing 
them  true,  the  belief  of  them  is  not  necessary  to  salva- 


30 

tion.  We  may  adore  our  blessed  Saviour  in  tlie  cele- 
bration of  tbe  lioly  mysteries,  without  adoring  tbat 
•wbicli  tlie  priest  holds  up  to  the  gaze  of  the  people. 
"We  may  be  saved,  I  trust,  without  Avorshiping  the 
images  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  other  saints ;  without 
worshiping  their  relics,  and  without  believing,  with  an 
undoubting  faith,  that  they  themselves  now  reign  with 
Christ,  while  their  bodies,  which  are  part  of  themselves, 
are  yet  mingled  with  the  dust.*  If  we  are  in  error  in 
believing  that  the  souls  of  the  faithful  departed  are  in 
a  state  of  peace  and  refreshment,  expecting  with  holy 
hope  the  resurrection  of  their  bodies,  their  acquittal 
in  judgment,  and  their  admission  to  the  kingdom  of 
glory,  it  is  at  least  difficult  to  see  how  our  salvation 
can  be  promoted  by  exchanging  this  comforting  doc- 
trine for  the  revolting  belief  that  they  cannot  attain 
to  the  final  consummation  of  their  hopes,  except 
through  a  process  of  purgatorial  torment.  And  if  we 
receive  the  sacrament  in  both  kinds,  as  our  Lord  com- 
manded, it  can  never  be  necessary  for  us  to  be  resolved 
whether  whole  Christ  and  a  true  sacrament  be  receiv- 
ed under  one  kind  only  or  not. 

That  these  propositions  are  not,  even  in  the  opinion 
of  Romanists  themselves,  so  necessary  but  that  they 
may  be  ignored  or  disbelieved  without  peril  to  salva- 
tion, apj)ears  from  these  two  considerations : 

First.  That  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  in  the 
churclies  in  communion  with  her,  all  who  are  baptized, 
as  well  adults  as  infants,  are  baptized  into  no  other 
faith  than  that  which  is  contained  in  the  Apostles' 
creed.     I   would  not   advance   this   argument  if  the 

*  An  exception,  however,  should  be  made  in  the  case  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  for 
whose  bodily  presence  in  heaven  the  Roman  Church  has  consistently  provided 
by  the  story  of  the  Assumption.     See  Appendix  M. 


31 

Koman  creed,  wMcli  contains  these  controverted  pro- 
positions were,  like  tlie  Niceue  creed,  an  expansion  or 
explanation  of  tlie  Apostles'  creed.     Every  man,  how- 
ever, who  compares  the  two,  may  see  that  it  is  not ; 
but  that  the  former  contains  several  distinct  propo- 
sitions, no  germ  of  which  is  to  be  found  in  the  latter  * 
Assuming,  then,  the  matter  of  the  two  creeds,  the 
Catholic  creed  and  the  Roman  creed  to  be  substan- 
tially different,  I  argue  that  Romanists  themselves  do 
not  believe  the  latter  to  be  of  the  same  necessity  to 
salvation  as  the  former ;  for,  if  they  do,  why  are  they 
not   baptized   into   it  ?     In   fact,  no   member  of  the 
Roman  communion  has  been  baptized  into  the  Roman 
creed  ;  all  the  members  of  that  communion  have  been 
baptized  only  into  the   Catholic  creed ;  and  they  are 
obliged  to  believe  and  profess  the  matters  contained  in 
the  Roman  creed,  not  by  their  baptismal  vows,  but 
by  the  order  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.t 

The  other  consideration  is,  that  the  Roman  Church 
excuses  all  those  of  its  own  communion  who  disl^elieved 
these  controverted  doctrines  prior  to  the  definition  of 
them  by  the  council  of  Trent.  This  again  shows  con- 
clusively, that,  Romanists  themselves  being  judges,  these 
controverted  doctrines  are  not  necessary  to  salvation 
in  such  sense  that  a  man  may  not  disbelieve  them,  and, 
much  more,  be  ignorant  of  them,  without  peril  to  his 
soul.  J     And  as  there  is  no  intrinsic  necessity  in  these 

*  I  am  not  aware  that  any  sober-minded  Romanist  pretends  to  do  more  than 
resolve  the  articles  of  his  new  creed  into  that  part  of  the  Apostles'  creed,  which 
professes  belief  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church.  But  this  connection,  if  admitted, 
only  shows,  and  is,  I  believe,  only  meant  to  show,  that  these  controverted  pro- 
positions, when  defined  by  the  Church,  must  be  received  on  her  authority.  In 
this  case,  however,  the  propositions  may  be  something  beside  the  matter  con- 
tained in  the  Apostles'  creed,  and  be  held  necessary  to  salvation,  not  ex  necessi- 
tate medii,  so  that  they  cannot  be  ignored  or  disbelieved  without  peril  to  salva- 
tion, but  necessary  only  because  the  Church  enjoins  them  ;  which  is  a  different 
consideration  and  proceeds  upon  a  different  principle. 

t  See  Appendix  P.  t  See  Appendix  Q. 


32 

controverted  tenets,  so  neither  is  there  any  sucli  ex- 
trinsic evidence  of  tlieir  having  been  taught  by  the 
Apostles  as  to  convict  any  person  who  denies  them  of 
irreverence  or  obstinacy.  If  there  were,  the  early 
fathers,  at  least,  could  not  have  been  ignorant  of  it 
without  fault ;  and  yet  we  often  find  the  Eomanist  ex- 
cusing even  their  errors  on  the  ground  that  they  lived 
before  the  matters  in  which  he  supposes  them  to  err 
were  defined  by  the  Church. 

What  then  is  the  principle  on  which  their  separa- 
tion j)roceeds?  On  what  principle  is  it  that  these 
matters  are  changed  from  controverted  propositions, 
not  into  articles  of  peace,  to  which  it  is  sufiicient  that 
we  offer  no  opposition,  but  into  articles  of  faith,  to  be 
received  with  firm  and  unwavering  assent  as  the  reve- 
lations of  God?  How  is  it  that  matters  which  are 
neither  necessary  in  themselves,  ha\4ng  no  essential 
connection  with  the  Christian  faith,  and  supported  by 
no  such  extrinsic  evidence  as  to  convince  us  of  their 
Apostolic  origin,  have  come  to  be  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, as  much  so  as  the  doctrine  contained  in  the 
Apostles'  creed  ?  The  answer  is,  that  these  matters  are 
imposed  on  the  consciences  of  the  separatists  by  an  au- 
thority to  which  they  think  that  they  and  all  Christians 
owe  an  unquestioning  submission  ;  and  that,  in  deference 
to  this  authority,  they  are  received  without  inquiry, 
without  examination,  as  the  undoubted  revelations  of 
God  :  and  the  authority  to  which  they  thus  submit  is 
that  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  On  the  9th  day  of  De- 
cember, A.  D.  1564,  the  then  Bishop  of  Rome  pub- 
lished a  bull,  in  which  these  controverted  propositions 
were  dif>:ested  into  the  form  of  a  creed,  or  rather  of  a 
most  solemn  oath ;  in  which  bull  he  distinctly  com- 
mands all  his  subjects  to  vow,  promise,  and  swear  (so 


33 

help  them  God  and  the  holy  gosj)els  !)  that  they  will 
most  constantly  retain  and  confess,  entire  and  invio- 
late to  their  latest  breath,  these  propositions  of  the 
schools  as  (equally  with  the  Apostles'  creed)  the  true 
Catholic  faith,  without  which  no  man  can  be  saved.''^ 

It  is  to  no  purpose  to  say  that  the  matters  contained 
in  this  new  creed  had  been  previously  defined  by  the 
Council  of  Trent.  For  this  council  has  no  pretence  to 
be  considered  as  rej^resentingf  the  Universal  Church. 
It  was  convoked  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  of  course 
could  not  be  recognized  either  by  the  Eastern 
Churches,  or  by  any  other  portion  of  the  Church 
Catholic,  which  denied  his  authority  to  convoke  it ; 

*  Compare  with  this  act  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  the  following  decree  of  the 
Universal  Council  of  Ephesus,  assembled  A.  D.  431,  by  the  Emperor  Theodo- 
sius  the  Younger,  to  settle  the  dispute  which  had  been  raised  in  the  Church  by 
the  doctrines  of  Nestorius,  Bishop  of  Constantinople.  "  These  things  having 
been  read,  the  holy  Synod  has  determined  that  no  person  shall  be  allowed  to 
bring  forward,  or  to  write,  or  to  compose  any  other  creed  besides  that  which 
was  settled  by  the  holy  Fathers,  who  were  assembled  in  the  city  of  Aicsea,  with 
the  Holy  Ghost.  But  those  who  shall  dare  to  compose  any  other  creed,  or  to 
exhibit  or  produce  any  such  to  those  who  wish  to  turn  to  the  acknowledgment 
of  the  truth,  whether  from  Heathenism  or  Judaism,  or  any  heresy  whatever,  if 
they  are  bishops  or  clergymen,  they  shall  be  deposed,  the  bishops  from  their 
Episcopal  office,  and  the  clergymen  from  the  clergy  ;  but  if  they  are  of  the  laity, 
they  shall  be  anathematized."  From  this  time  the  creed  set  forth  by  the  second 
OEcumenical  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381,  and  which  is  commonly 
called  the  Niccne  creed,  was  held  in  the  utmost  veneration  by  all  the  Catholic 
Churches  of  the  East  and  West.  The  first  addition  that  was  made  to  it  washy 
Pope  Nicholas  I.,  in  the  ninth  century,  and  consisted  in  the  words  and  the  Son, 
after  the  word  Father,  in  speaking  of  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  This 
led  to  the  great  schism  of  the  East  and  West,  a  schism  never  to  be  ended,  says 
our  illustrious  Bishop  Pearson,  till  those  words,  and  the  Son,  are  taken  out  of  the 
creed.  The  next  addition  to  this  venerable  symbol  was  by  Pope  Pius  IV.,  A.  D. 
1564.     See  Appendix  R. 

+  "  Several  bishops  were  for  its  taking  the  title  of  Qilcumenical  Council 
representing  the  Universal  Church  ;  but  it  was  at  last  resolved  that  they  should 
only  take  the  title  of  Holy  Sacred  CEcumenical  and  Universal  Council."'— ^"/'««"s 
Church  Hist.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  74.  This,  however,  was  done,  though  Dupin  does  not 
mention  the  fact,  in  opposition  to  the  Protestants,  who  contended  that  the  laity 
should  be  admitted  to  vote 

3 


34 

and  it  consisted  of  a  small  number  of  bishops, 
cliiefly  Italians  and  Spaniards.*  Nor  lias  this  council 
obtained  any  additional  weight  of  authority  by  the 
reception  of  its  decrees ;  and  the  reason  is,  that  they 
were  received  without  examination ;  for  within  a  year 
after  the  council  brought  its  deliberations  to  a  close, 
its  definitions  were  collected  into  a  creed,  and  peremp- 
torily enjoined  by  the  court  of  Rome  to  be  believed 
without  inquiry  and  examination  by  all  Christians, 
under  peril  of  damnation.  Hence,  we  are  fully  author- 
ized to  say  that  these  controverted  propositions  were 
received  as  articles  of  the  faith  on  the  principle  of  obe- 
dience to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  ;  that  very  Bishop  whom 
not  only  the  reformed,  but  even  the  Roman  Catholic 
bishops  of  England  had  declared,  in  that  very  age,  to 
have  no  jurisdiction  conferred  on  him  by  God  in  that 
realm.    "• 

Now,  when  the  controversy  is  brought  to  this  issue, 
it  may  soon  be  terminated.  For  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
has  no  more  authority  to  prescribe  articles  of  fiiith  to 
the  Catholic  Church  than  he  has  to  depose  sovereigns 
from  their  kingdoms.  The  assumption  of  such  author- 
ity rests  on  the  ground,  that  the  Church  of  Rome  is  w- 
tually  the  Catholic  Cliurch,  so  that  they,  and  only  they 
who  take  their  faith  from  the  See  of  Rome,  are  in  com- 
munion with  the  Catholic  Church.  On  this  principle  the 
greater  number  of  the  Apostolic  Sees,  and  the  innu- 
merable Christians  who  are  subject  to  them,  are  cut 
off  from  the  body  of  Christ,  and  the  Catholic  Church 
is  limited  to  a  multitude  of  Christians  united  under  a 
visible  monarchical  head  at  Rome:  a  notion  that 
might  be  easily  refuted  from  writers  of  the  Roman 

*  The  assembly  was  composed  only  of  a  small  number  of  prelates,  almost  all 
Italians  and  Spaniards. — Dupin's  Church  Hist.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  72. 


35 

communion  itself,  were  it  not  so  vain  and  extravagant 
tliat  to  espouse  it  is  the  sure  mark  of  a  weak  or  distem- 
pered mind.* 

In  denying  tliat  tlie  Bisliop  of  Rome  lias  any  juris- 
diction given  to  liim  by  Gtod  in  tliese  United  States  of 
America,  (wliicli  is  the  application  to  our  own  case,  of 
a  principle  derived  to  us  from  our  mother  Church,  in 
connection  with  the  faith  and  sacraments  of  Christ,)  we 

*  I  have  spoken  of  the  Roman  schism  in  England  because  it  is  more  immedi- 
ately connected  with  the  subject  of  my  discourse.  But  in  truth  the  imposition 
of  this  new  creed  as  a  creed,  of  these  school  opinions  as  terms  of  Catholic  com- 
munion, makes  the  Roman  Church  schismatic  in  reference  to  those  Protestants  in 
other  countries  whom  she  has  by  this  means  driven  from  her  c  immunion.  For 
the  articles  themselves  being  no  part  of  the  essential  faith  of  Christ,  and  yet 
being  imposed  by  the  Roman  Church,  not  as  probable  truths  for  the  direction  of 
its  own  members,  but  as  of  the  essential  faith  of  Chiist,  to  which  every  one  is 
bound  heartily  to  assent  as  to  the  revelation  of  God,  are  sinful  terms  of  commu- 
nion ;  and  consequently  the  guilt  of  the  schism  which  they  cause  rests  on  the 
party  imposing  them.  That  the  adherents  of  the  Roman  Church  are  the  more 
numerous  party,  is  no  proof  that  they  are  not  schismatics.  Truth  is  not  deter- 
mined by  plurality  of  votes,  and  our  faith  in  the  promise  of  Christ  to  his  Church 
need  not  be  shaken,  though  the  whole  of  the  Western  Church  should  J  un  into 
schism  and  heresy. 

It  is  the  Church,  or  rather  the  Pope  and  Court  of  Rome,  "  which,"  says  Bram  - 
hall,  "  partly  by  obtruding  new  creeds  and  new  articles  of  faith,  and  especially 
this  doctrine,  that  it  is  necessary  for  every  Christian  under  pain  of  damnation 
to  be  subject  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  by  divine  ordination 
upon  earth,  (that  is,  in  effect,  to  be  subject  to  themselves  who  are  his  council 
and  officers)  yea,  even  those  who,  by  reason  of  their  remoteness,  never  heard  of 
the  name  of  Rome,  without  which  it  will  profit  them  nothing  lo  have  holden  the 
Catholic  faith  entirely-,  and  partly  by  their  tyrannical  and  uncharitable  censures, 
have  separated  all  the  Asiatic,  African,  Grecian,  Russian  and  Protestant  churches 
from  their  communion  ;  not  only  negatively,  in  the  way  of  Christian  discretion,  by 
withdrawing  themselves  for  fear  of  infection,  but  privatively  and  authoritative- 
ly, by  way  ol  jurisdiction  excluding  them  (so  much  as  in  them  lieth)  from  the 
communion  of  Christ  ;  though  those  churches  so  chased  away  by  them  contain 
three  times  more  Christian  souls  than  the  Church  of  Rome  itself  with  all  its  de- 
pendents and  adherents  ;  many  of  which  do  suffer  more  pressures  for  the  testi- 
mony of  Christ,  than  the  Romanists  do  gain  advantages,  and  are  ready  to  shed 
the  last  drop  of  their  blood  for  the  least  known  particle  of  saving  truth  ;  only 
because  they  will  not  strike  topsail  to  the  Pope's  cross-keys,  nor  buy  indulgences 
and  such  like  trinkets  at  Rome.  It  is  not  passion,  but  action,  that  makes  a 
schismatic  ;  to  desert  the  communion  of  Christians  voluntarily,  not  to  be  thrust 
away  from  it  unwillingly." — Just.  Vind.,  c.  8. 


36 

deny  also,  by  necessary  implication,  tliat  our  Lord  lias 
appointed  a  visible  bead  on  eartb  witb  a  power  of  gov- 
ernment over  all  Cbristians,  or  all  Cburcbes.*  We  re- 
ject tbis  tbeory  of  a  sj^iritual  monarcby  for  all  cburcbes 
and  Cbristians  on  eartb,  because  we  find  no  warrant  for 
it  in  Scripture  or  antiquity;  moreover,  we  believe 
tbat  it  is  as  visionary  and  presumptuous  as  is  tbe 
dream  of  a  temporal  monarchy  for  all  nations  and 
peoj^les,  and  tbat  tbe  attempts  to  erect  tbe  one  are  as 
surely  productive  of  scbisms  and  batred  in  tbe  Cburcb, 
as  would  be  tbe  attempts  to  erect  tbe  other  of  wars 
and  bloodshed  in  tbe  world.  On  tbe  other  hand, 
bowever,  we  do  not  regard  tbe  Cburcb  of  Christ  as  a 
promiscuous  assemblage,  nor  do  we  believe  tbat  a 
mere  voluntary  association,  making  for  itself  officers, 
and  compiling  for  itself  a  creed  out  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  setting  up  for  itself  observances  in  imitation  of 
tbe  Holy  Sacraments,  becomes  thereby  a  Cburcb  of 
Christ.  We  believe  the  Cburcb  of  Christ  to  be  a  con- 
tinuous body,  gathered  out  of  tbe  world,  in  every  age 
and  nation  in  which  it  subsists,  by  a  ministry  which 
Christ  himself  sent  (before  bis  ascension  into  heaven) 
with  a  mission  capable  of  perpetuating  itself  to  the  end 
of  time ;  united  in  a  traditionary  faith,  which  this 
ministry  was  instructed  to  guard  and  transmit ;  nour- 
ished by  that  Word  of  God  which  tbis  ministry  was 
ordained  to  preach,  and  bound  together  in  sacraments 
which  tbis  ministry  is  authorized  to  dispense.  In 
every  country  where  the  Cburcb  exists,  its  members 
are  subject  to  presbyters,  and  these  presbyters  to  their 
bishops,  and  all  particular  bishops  to  the  decrees  and 
canons  of  councils  or  synods  of  tbe  whole ;  whicb 
councils  or  synods  are  bmited  in  their  turn  in  matters 

*  See  Appendix  S 


37 


of  faitli  by  Holy  Scripture  and  tlie  creeds  of  tlie 
Catholic  Cliurcli.  No  subordination  beyoud  tliis  is 
required  by  tlie  di\dne  law,  and  hence  no  Cliiircli  of 
any  one  country  is  subordinated,  by  the  law  of  God, 
to  the  Church  of  any  other  country.  All  further 
union  is  a  union  of  co-ordination^  which  supposes  that 
the  churches  of  different  countries  stand  on  an  equal 
footing ;  that  all  are  mutually  bound  to  receive  and 
extend  to  one  another  the  rights  and  privileges  of 
ineml)ership ;  and  that  no  one  Church  is  justified  in 
erecting  its  peculiar  decrees  and  customs  as  terms  of 
Catholic  communion.  This  union  of  sulordination  in 
the  Church  of  each  particular  province  or  country,  and 
of  co-ordination  amonsf  the  churches  of  different  and 
distant  countries,  was  the  natural  result  of  the  propa- 
gation and  extension  of  the  Church  by  messengers 
who,  like  the  Apostles  of  our  Lord,  were  clothed  with 
authority,  and  all  with  equal  authority,  flowing  from 
one  and  the  same  commission.  While  these  principles 
of  union  prevailed,  the  Holy  Church  throughout  all 
the  world  was  of  one  language  and  one  speech ;  all 
particular  churches  were  united  in  the  same  faith,  and 
the  members  of  the  whole,  though  scattered  cdjroad,  as 
God  intended,  in  the  east  and  the  west,  the  north  and 
the  south,  were  yet  partakers  of  the  same  sacraments. 
In  their  present  divisions  and  estrangements  they  are 
more  like  a  Babel  than  the  mystical  body  of  Christ ; 
and  in  their  confusion  we  may  read  the  judgment  of 
God  blasting  the  proud  device  which  has  sought  to 
collect  and  consolidate  all  churches  and  all  Christians 
under  the  government  of  one  local  and  visible  head  ; 
wMch  has  taken  brick  for  stone,  and  slime  for  mortar, 
and  sought  to  erect  a  toiver  ivhose  top  shoidd  reach 
to  heaven. — Genesis  xi.,  1-9. 


38 

It  was  on  this  principle  of  co-ordinate  union  among 
equal  cliurclies,  whose  members  should  be  subordinate 
to  their  proper  local  authorities,  that  the  Church  of 
England  proceeded  in^her  reformation  from  popery;  and 
it  is  in  vain  to  seek  to  disparage  the  principle  by  the 
epithet  of  Anglican^  as  if  it  were  a  mere  local  or 
national  device,  when  we  know  that  the  union  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  while  it  continued  one  and  unbroken, 
was  in  fact  maintained  on  this  principle ;  that  its  most 
lamentable  schisms  and  divisions  have  in  fact  been 
caused  by  the  arrogant  attempts  of  the  Koman  papacy 
to  effect  union  on  the  opposite  principle  of  a  universal 
monarchy ;  that  the  principle  is  one  which  in  its  nature 
cannot  array,  and  in  fact  never  has  arrayed,  Christians 
of  any  one  country  in  opposition  to  their  civil  rulers,  by 
requiring  of  them  a  subjection,  of  any  kind  whatever, 
to  a  local  jurisdiction  out  of  their  country;  that  so  far 
as  the  principle  has  been  acted  on,  since  the  time  of  the 
reformation  from  popery,  it  has  been  found  to  be  pro- 
ductive of  the  same  advantages  which  attended  it  in 
the  ancient  Church  f  and  finally,  that  as  there  is  no 
other  obstacle  to  this  jirinciple  of  co-ordinate  union 
than  the  antagonistic  principle  of  a  monarchical  union 
for  the  ae:oTandizement  of  the  court  of  Rome,  so  the 
time  may  come  when  the  churches  in  Eurojie  and 
America,  now  subject  to  the  Roman  Pontiff,  may  dis- 
cover the  fallacy  and  pernicious  consequences  of  their 
fundamental  principle  of  union,  and  seek  to  recover 
and  establish  Catholic  communion  among  the  churches 

*  The  Church  of  England,  the  Episcopal  Church  of  Scotland,  and  the  Protest- 
ant Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States,  may  be  cited  as  examples  of  co-ordi- 
nate union  at  the  present  time  The  liturgies  and  other  formularies  of  these 
Churches  differ  in  many  points,  and  some  of  these  points  of  importance,  and 
yet  the  pulpits  and  communion  of  each  are  open  to  the  clergy  and  communicants 
of  the  other.  In  the  Church  of  England  I  include  the  churches  of  Ireland,  and 
of  all  the  British  Provinces. 


39 

of  different  countries,  on  a  principle  consistent  witli 
tlie  ancient  and  proper  local  independence  of  eacli  * 

That  tlie  Cliurcli  of  England  proceeded  on  tliis  prin- 
ciple in  lier  reformation  from  popery,  appears  from  lier 
own  declaration.  In  tlie  SOth  of  lier  "  Constitutions 
and  Canons,"  set  fortli  A.  D.  1603,  liaving  justified 
her  use  of  the  cross  in  baptism,  by  reference  of  it  to 
the  age  next  succeeding  the  Apostles',  and  having  re- 
marked "  that  in  process  of  time  the  sign  of  the  cross 
was  greatly  abused  in  the  Church  of  Rome^  especially 
after  the  corruption  of  popery  had  once  possessed  it," 
she  adds ;  "  but  the  abuse  of  a  thing  doth  not  take 
away  the  lawful  use  of  it.  Nay,  so  far  was  it  from 
the  purpose  of  the  Church  of  England^  to  forsake  and 
reject  the  churches  of  Italy ^  France^  Spam^  Germany^ 
or  any  such  like  churches,  in  all  things  which  they  held 
and  practised,  that,  as  the  apology  for  the  Church  of 
EnHand  confesseth,  it  doth  with  reverence  retain 
those  ceremonies,  which  do  neither  endamage  the 
Church  of  God,  nor  offend  the  minds  of  sober  men, 
and  only  departed  from  them  in  those  particular 
points,  wherein  they  were  fallen,  both  from  themselves 
in  their  ancient  integrity,  and  from  the  Apostolic 
Churches  which  were  their  first  founders." 

There  are  moments  and  events  in  the  affairs  of  men, 
on  which  depend  the  destinies  of  future  ages  and 
nations.  Such  a  period  is  that  which  we  have  been 
considering:.  What  the  reformation  effected  for  Eng- 
land  we  know,  for  its  results  are  spread  out  on  the 
page  of  history ;  how  much  greater  benefits  might 
have  flowed  from  it  had  it  met  with  no  unnatural 
obstruction,  we  know  not.  What  the  state  of  things 
has  been,  and   still  is,  in  those  countries   of  Europe 

*  See  Appendix  T. 


40 

the  cliurclies  of  whic]i  have  no  other  notion  of  commii- 
nion  than  that  of  subjection  to  a  monarchical  head 
at  Kome,  is  before  us.  What  the  state  of  things  might 
have  been  and  mis^ht  now  be  in  those  same  coun- 
tries  of  Europe,  if  the  churches  of  those  countries 
had  then  assumed  the  same  ground  with  the  Church  of 
England,  and  sought  to  maintain  communion  with 
one  another  as  co-ordinate  churches,  distinguished 
indeed  by  local  laws  and  usages,  but  united  in  the 
faith  and  sacraments  of  Christ;  what  blessings  that 
are  now  wantino:  micrht  have  been  obtained;  what 
evils,  religious,  political  and  social,  that  are  now  con- 
fessed and  bewailed,  might  have  been  avoided ;  this 
can  be  fully  and  perfectly  known  to  God  alone. 

It  is  with  reluctance,  brethren,  that  I  have  so  far 
departed  from  my  usual  course,  as  to  bring  before  you 
topics  of  a  polemical  nature.  You  have  a  right  to  ex- 
pect from  the  pulpit  discourses  which  have  a  more 
direct  bearins:  on  the  faith  and  duties  of  the  Christian 
life,  and  I  would  not,  without  reason,  disaj^point  your 
expectation;  but  when  an  event  transpires  which 
alarms  the  weak,  and  is  made  an  occasion,  by  designing 
men,  of  scatterins:  around  them  the  seeds  of  distrust 
and  suspicion,  I  am  willing  to  set  before  you  the 
grounds  which  will  enable  you  to  estimate  such  an 
event  at  its  true  value ;  and,  if  I  am  not  mistaken,  the 
natural  inference  from  our  discourse  is,  that  the  un- 
happy defection,^  to  which  I  have  tacitly  referred,  is 
a  new  instance  of  human  weakness  and  folly  ;  and  one 
which  we  may  distinguish  from  others  only  by  bestow- 

*  The  Right  Rev.  Levi  Silliman  Ives,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  of  North 
Carolina,  who,  under  plea  of  conscience,  has  violated  the  most  solemn  vows, 
and  deserted  a  post  which  he  had  long  seemed  unwilling  to  fill  with  quietness 
and  unable  to  maintain  with  credit.     See  Appendix  U. 


41 

ing  on  it  a  somewliat  larger  tribute  of  pity  and  com- 
passion. 

Never  let  us  cease  to  regard  it  as  an  instance  of 
God's  favor  and  goodness  towards  us,  that  in  the 
reformation  of  our  Churcli  from  the  corruptions  of 
popery,  His  good  Providence  hath  preserved  to  us  the 
ancient  Apostolical  government,  and  through  it  a 
ministry  divinely  authorized  to  preach  the  Word  of 
Christ,  and  to  administer  His  sacraments.  Let  us  show 
our  gratitude  to  God  for  this  blessing,  by  making  it  our 
sincere  endeavor  daily  to  increase  and  go  forward  in 
the  knowledge  and  faith  of  God  and  his  Son  Jesus 
Christ,  by  His  Holy  Sj^irit ;  so  that  as  well  by  God's 
ministers  as  by  them  to  whom  they  have  been  appoint- 
ed ministers,  the  Holy  name  of  God  may  be  always 
glorified,  and  His  blessed  kingdom  enlarged,  through 
the  same.  His  Sojt  Jesus  Cheist. 


43 


APPENDIX 


k.—Page  3. 

In  the  yecar  of  our  Lord  1521,  a  consistory  was  held  at  Eome,  un- 
der Leo  X.,  then  in  the  nhith  year  of  his  papacy,  in  which  Mr.  John 
Clark,  (sometime  afterward  Bishop  of  Bath,)  orator  for  Henry  VIII. 
King  of  England,  France,  and  Ireland,  presented  to  his  Holiness,  in 
a  set  speech,  and  with  many  formalities,  a  treatise  which  his  royal 
master  had  composed  against  Martin  Luther,  entitled,  "  Assertio 
Septem  Sacramentorum  ;"  or,  "A  Defence  of  the  Seven  Sacraments." 
The  oration  of  Clark  (which  is  a  furious  and  abusive  tirade  against 
Luther)  and  the  response  of  his  Holiness  (which  is  in  good  taste)  are 
curiosities  in  their  way  ;  but  the  bull  which  soon  after  followed  is 
Something  more:  it  is  the  recorded  and  still  unrevoked  judgment  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,  whereby,  in  virtue  of  her  power  of  benediction, 
she  has,  with  a  bountiful  and  liberal  hand,  blessed  Henry  VIII.  and 
all  who  should  spring  from  his  loins,  bestowed  on  him  the  title  of 
Defender  of  the  Faith,  in  order  to  enable  and  engage  him  to  use  the 
material  sword  (which  soon  after  fell  on  the  heads  of  poor  Fisher  and 
Sir  Thomas  More)  for  the  excision  of  unsound  members  of  the 
Church,  and  forbidden  all  men  to  transgress  its  mandate  in  the  pre- 
mises under  pain  of  incurring  the  "  indignation  of  Almighty  God,  and 

of  the  holy  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul."     We  are  content  to  say 

that  Henry  VIII.  was  an  instrument  and  occasion  in  the  hands  of  God 
(and  such  have  been  many  vile  and  unprincipled  men)  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  good.  Whether  he  were  the  monster  of  lust  which  he  is 
commonly  represented  to  have  been,  is  a  question  in  which  the  Re. 
formed  Church,  as  such,  has  no  concern  ;  but  whether  they  who  own 
the  Church  of  Rome  for  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches  can 
vilify  him  (however  much  he  may  deserve  it)  without  either  exposing 
their  souls  to  danger,  or  imputing  vanity  and  levity  (see  the  bull)  to 
the  judgment  of  their  said  mother  and  mistress,  is  a  question  for  their 
own  doctors  and  casuists  to  decide.  I  annex  the  bull  as  I  find  it  pre- 
fixed to  the  treatise  of  Henry  VIII.  on  the  Seven  Sacraments,  (a 
treatise  which  is  worthy  of  any  modern  Pope  for  its  theology,  and 


44 

rivals  Luther  himself  in  invective  ;)  a  translation  of  which  vi'as  printed 
in  Dublin,  1776. 

Leo  X.,  Bishop, 

And  Servant  of  the  Servants  of  God,  to  our  most  dear  son  in  Christ, 
Henry,  the  illustrious  King  of  England  and  Defender  of  the  Faith, 
sends  Greeting,  and  gives  his  Benedictions. 

By  the  good  Pleasure  and  Will  of  Almighty  God,  presiding  in  the 
Government  of  the  Universal  Ctiurch,  though  unworthy  so  great 
charge.  We  daily  employ  all  our  Thoughts,  both  at  home  and 
abroad,  for  the  continual  Propagation  of  the  Holy  Catholic  Faith, 
without  which  none  can  be  saved.  And  that  the  methods  which  are 
taken  for  repressing  such  as  labor  to  overthrow  the  Church,  or  per- 
vert and  stain  her  by  wicked  Glosses  and  malicious  Lies,  may  be 
carried  on  v/ith  continual  Profit,  as  is  ordered  by  the  Sound  Doctrine 
of  the  Faithful ;  and  especially  of  such  as  shine  in  regal  Dignity,  We 
employ  with  all  our  Power,  our  Endeavours,  and  the  Parts  of  our 
Ministry. 

And  as  other  Roman  Bishops,  our  Predecessors,  have  been  accus- 
tomed to  bestow  some  Particular  Favours  upon  Catholic  Princes,  as 
the  Exigencies  of  Affairs  and  Times  recj^uired,  especially  on  those  who, 
in  tempestuous  Times,  and  whilst  the  rapid  Perfidiousness  of  Schis- 
matics and  Heretics  raged,  not  only  persevered  constantly  in  the 
true  Faith  and  unspotted  Devotion  of  the  Holy  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  but  also  as  the  Legitimate  Sons  and  stoutest  Champions  of 
the  same,  have  opposed  themselves,  both  spiritually  and  temporally, 
against  the  mad  Fury  of  Schismatics  and  Heretics  :  So  also.  We, 
for  your  Majesty's  most  excellent  Works,  and  worthy  Actions  done 
for  Us,  and  this  Holy  See,  in  which  by  Divine  Permission  we  pre- 
side, do  desire  to  confer  upon  your  Majesty,  with  Honour  and  im- 
mortal Praises,  That,  which  may  enable  and  engage  you  carefully  to 
drive  away  from  our  Lord's  Flock  the  Wolves,  and  cut  off  with  the 
material  sword  the  rotten  members  that  infect  the  Mystical  Body  of 
Jesus  Christ,  and  confirm  the  Hearts  of  the  almost  discomforted 
Faithful  in  the  Solidity  of  Faith.  Truly  when  our  beloved  Son, 
John  Clark,  your  Majesty's  Orator,  did  lately  in  our  Consistory,  in 
Presence  of  our  venerable  Brethren,  Cardinals  of  the  Sacred  Roman 
Church,  and  divers  others  holy  Prelates,  present  unto  Us  a  Book, 
which  your  Majesty,  moved  by  your  Charity,  (which  effects  every 
Thing  readily  and  well.)  and  inflamed  with  Zeal  to  the  holy  Catholic 
Faith,  and  Fervour  of  Devotion  towards  Us,  and  this  Holy  See  ;  did 
compose,  as  a  most  noble  and  wholesome  Antidote  against  the  Errors 
of  divers  Heretics,  often  condemned  by  this  Holy  See,  and  now  again 
revived  by  Martin  Luther:  When,  I  say,  he  offered  this  Book  to  Us, 
to  be  examined,  and  approved  by  Our  Authority  ;  and  also  declared, 
in  a  very  eloquent  Discourse,  That,  as  your  Majesty,  had  by  true 
Reasons,  and  the  undeniable  Authority  of  Scripture  and  holy 
Fathers,  confuted  the  notorious  Errors  of  Luther ;  so  you  are  like- 
wise ready,  and  resolved  to  prosecute,  with  all  the  Forces  of  your 


45 

Kingdom,  those  who  shall  presume  to  follow,  or  defend  them  ;  having 
found  in  this  Book  most  admirable  Doctrine,  sprinkled  with  the  Dew 
of  Divine  Grace ;  We  rendered  infinite  thanks  to  Almighty  God, 
from  whom  every  good  Thing,  and  every  perfect  gift  proceeds,  for 
being  pleased  to  fill  with  his  Grace,  and  to  inspire  your  most  excel- 
lent^Mind,  inclined  for  all  Good,  to  defend,  by  your  Writings,  his 
Holy  Faith,  against  the  new  Broacher  of  these  condemned  Errors ; 
and  to  unite  all  other  Christians,  by  your  Example,  to  assist  and 
fovour,  with  all  their  Power,  the  Orthodox  Eaith,  and  evangelical 
Truth,  now  under  so  great  Peril  and  Danger. 

Considering  that  it  is  but  just,  that  those  who  undertake  pious 
Labours,  in  defence  of  the  Faith  of  Christ,  should  be  extolled  wilh  all 
Praise  and  Honour  ;  and  being  willing,  not  only  to  magnify  with 
deserved  Praise,  and  approve  with  our  Authority,  what  your  Ma- 
jesty has  with  Learning  and  Eloquence  writ  against  Luther  ;  but  also 
to  honour  your  Majesty  with  such  a  Title,  as  shall  give  all  Christians 
to  understand,  as  well  in  our  Times,  as  in  succeeding  Ages,  how 
acceptable  and  welcome  your  Gift  was  to  Us,  especially  in  this  junc- 
ture of  Time :  We,  the  true  successor  of  St.  Peter,  (whom  Christ, 
before  his  Ascension,  left  as  his  Vicar  upon  Earth,  and  to  whom  he 
committed  the  Care  of  his  Flock.)  presiding  in  this  Holy  See,  from 
whence  all  Dignity  and  Titles  have  their  Source  ;  have  with  our  Bre- 
thren maturely  deliberated  upon  these  Things  ;  and  with  one  consent 
unanimously  decreed  to  bestow  on  your  Majesty  this  Title,  viz  : 
Defender  of  the  Faith.  And,  as  we  have  by  this  Title  honoured  you  ; 
we  likewise  command  all  Christians,  that  they  name  your  Majesty  by 
this  Title  ;  and  that  in  their  Writings  to  your  Majesty,  immediately 
after  the  word  King,  they  add.  Defender  of  tire  Fnith. 

Having  thus  weighed,   and  diligently   considered   your  singular 
Merits,  we  could  not  have  invented  a  more  congruous  name,  nor 
more  worthy  your  Majesty,  than  this  worthy  and  most  excellent 
Title  ;  which,  as  often  as  you  hear,  or  read,  you  shall  remember  your 
own  merits  and  virtues  :   Nor  will  you,  by  this  Title,  exalt  yourself, 
or    become  proud,   but,  according  to    your  accustomed  Prudence, 
rather  more  humble  in  the  Faith  of  Christ ;   and  more  strong  and 
constant  in  your  Devotion  to  this  Holy  See,  by  which  you  were  ex- 
alted.     And  you  shall  rejoice  in  our  Lord,  who  is  the  Giver  of  all 
Good  Things,  for  leaving  such  a  perpetual  and  everlasting  monument 
of  your  Glory  to  Posterity,  and  showing  the  Way  to  others,  that  if 
they  also  covet  to  be  invested  with  such  a  Title,  they  may  study  to 
do  such  Actions,  and  to  follow  the  Steps  of  your  most  excellent  Ma- 
jesty ;  Whom,  with  your  wife,  children,  and  all  who  shall  spring  from 
you.  We  bless  with  a  bountiful  and   liberal  Hand ;  in  the  Name  of 
Him  from  whom  the  Power  of  Benediction  is  given  to  Us,  and  by 
whom  Kings  reign,  and  Princes  govern  ;  and  in  whose  Hands  are  the 
Hearts  of  Kings : 

Praying,  and  beseeching  the  most  High,  to  confirm  your  Majesty 
in  your  hoi  v  Purposes,  and  to  augment  your  Devotion  ;  and  for  your 
most  excellent  Deeds  in  Defence  of  his  Holy  Faith,  to  render  your 
Majesty  so  illustrious  and  famous  to  the  whole  World,  as  that  our 


46 

Judgment  in  adorning  you  with  so  remarkable  a  Title,  may  not  be 
thought  vain,  or  light,  by  any  Person  whatsoever;  and  finally,  after 
you  have  finished  your  course  in  this  Life,  that  he  may  make  you 
Partaker  of  his  eternal  Glory.  It  shall  not  be  Lawful  for  any  Person 
whatsoever,  to  infringe,  or  by  any  rash  Presumption  to  act  contrary 
to  This  Letter  of  our  Subscribing,  and  Command.  But,  if  any  one 
shall  presume  to  make  such  Attempt  ;  let  him  Know  that  he  shall 
thereby  incur  the  Indignation  of  Almighty  God,  and  of  the  holy  Apos- 
tles, Peter  and  Paul. 

Given  at  St.  Peter's  in  Rome,  the  fifth  of  the  Ides  of  October;  in 
the  year  of  our  Lord's  Incarnation  1521,  and  in  the  ninth  year  of  our 
papacy. 


B.—Fage  3. 

The  question  was  propounded  at  that  time  in  consequence  of  a 
"dispensation"  from  Rome.  For  Arthur,  the  eldest  son  of  Henry 
VII.,  had  married  Catharine,  daughter  of  Ferdinand,  King  of  Spain, 
and  died  about  five  months  after  the  marriage.  In  order  to  retain 
her  dowry  in  England,  Henry  VII.  proposed  to  Ferdinand  a  contract 
of  marriage  between  Catharine  and  his  second  son,  afterwards  Henry 
VIII.  The  proposition  was  acceptable  to  Ferdinand,  but  unfortu- 
nately the  marriage  of  a  brother's  wife  was  forbidden,  totidem  verbis, 
in  Leviticus  xviii.,  16.  To  remove  the  obstacle  recourse  was  had  to 
the  then  Pope  of  Rome,  Julius  II.,  who  granted  a  bull,  in  which  he 
says,  "  We,  by  apostolical  authority,  do  give  you  by  these  presents 
our  dispensation  to  contract  a  marriage  between  you  by  lawful  words 
in  the  present  tense,  and  after  such  contract  (even  though  it  be  already 
made)  lawfully  to  remain  in  the  same,"  &e.  In  virtue  of  this  license 
and  dispansation  the  contract  was  made,  though  the  marriage  (for 
Henry,  at  the  time  of  the  contract,  was  but  a  boy  of  twelve  years) 
was  not  solemnized  until  after  the  death  of  Henry  VII. 

The  question  of  the  lawfulness  of  the  marriage  was  not  mooted 
until  some  twenty  years  afterwards,  when  a  marriage  was  proposed 
between  Miry  (the  only  child  of  Henry  and  Catharine  who  lived  to 
adult  years)  and  the  Duke  of  Orleans,  the  second  son  of  Francis  I. 
"  Before  we  treat  of  such  marriage,"  said  one  of  the  councillors  of  the 
French  king,  "we  must  first  inquire  whether  the  Lady  Mary  be 
King  Henry's  lawful  daughter.  Because  she  was  born  of  the  Lady 
Catherine,  his  brother's  widow,  which  kind  of  marriages  are  contrary 
to  the  laws  of  God."     See  Mason,  (Lindsay's,  p.  126,  with  the  author- 


47 

ities  there  adduced,)  who  adds  :  "  This  scruple  concerning  that  mar- 
riage being  incestuous  was  first  raised  in  the  King  of  Spain's  court, 
from  whence  it  spread  itself  into  France  and  Flanders." 

Instigated  by  the  machinations  of  Cardinal  Wolsey,  (who  had  his 
own  ends  to  answer,)  Henry  VIII.  afterwards  applied  to  the  then 
Pope,  Clement  VII.,  to  declare  his  marriage  with  Catherine  invalid  ; 
and  Clement,  as  we  learn  from  his  private  secretary,  the  famous  his- 
torian, Guicciardini,  secretly  made  (and  gave  in  charge  to  Cardinal 
Campegio)  a  bull  decretal,  annulling  the  dispensation  of  Pope  Julius, 
and  pronouncing  the  marriage  to  be  of  no  force.^  See  the  ^x^ssage  of 
Guicciardini^  in  Lindsay's  3fason,  as  above. 

Wearied  with  the  delays  and  evasions  of  the  Papal  Court,  (for  the 
contingency  on  Avhich  the  use  of  the  decretal  depended  did  not  arise,) 
and  desirous — so  at  least  he  professed — to  have  the  matter  settled  one 
way  or  the  other  for  the  satisfaction  of  his  own  conscience,  Henry  final- 
ly submitted  the  question  to  the  convocation  of  the  clergy  of  his  king- 
dom, who  decided  (by  a  vote  of  253  to  19)  that  the  marriage,  being 
prohibited  by  the  law  of  God,  was  not  within  the  dispensation  of  the 
Pope.     "  In  this  same  convocation,"  adds  Mr.  Lindsay,  in  his  preface 
to  Mason,   "  the  last  under  Archbishop  Warham,  the  Pope's  Su- 
premacy began  to  be  warmly  disputed,  though  they  came  to  no  i-eso- 
lution  at  present;   but  soon  after,  in  Cranmer's  time,  they  did  come 
to  a  resolution,  in  both  Provinces,  that  by  the  Word  of  God  the 
Pope  has  no  more  jurisdiction  in  England  than  any  foreign  bishop  *, 
wherein  it  is  remarkable,  that,  in  the  province  of  Canterbury,  only 
four  of  the  lower  house  voted  for  the  Pope's  authority,  and  one 
demurred.    To  which  I  may  add,  that  about  the  same  time,  (to  wit, 
1534,)  Edward  Lee,  Archbishop  of  York,  John  Stokesly,  Bishop  of 
London,  Cathbert  Tunstal,  Bishop  of  Durham,  and  Stephen  Gardiner, 
Bishop  of  Winchester,  made  severally  their  solemn  and  voluntary 
profession  and  promise,  in  writing,  under  their  respective  hands  and 
seals,  and  in  the  faith  of  bishops,  declaring  (amongst  other  things) 
that  the  Papacy  of  Rome  is  not  ordained  of  God  by  holy  Scripture, 
but  set  up  only  by  man ;  and  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  is  not  to  be 
called  Pope,  nor  Supreme  Bishop,  or  Universal  Bishop,  nor  Most 
-   Holy  Lord,  but  only  ought  to  be  called  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  Fellow- 
Brother,  as  the  old  manner  of  the  most  ancient  bishops  hath  been,  &;c. 
"The  University  of  Cambridge,  by  a  public  and  solemn  Instrument 
under  their  common  seal,  did,  in  the  same  year,  determine  and  de- 
clare, '  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  hath  no  more  state,  authority,  and 
jurisdiction  given  him  of  God  in  the  Scriptures,  over  this  realm  of 


48 

England,  than  any  other  externe  bishop  hath.'  That  the  same  Bishop 
Gardiner,  (to  say  nothing  of  a  Latin  apology,  supposed  to  be  written 
by  him,  by  way  of  justification  of  the  king's  conduct,  in  answer  to  the 
Pope's  extravagant  bull,*)  in  his  book,  intituled,  "Z>e  Vera  Obedientia^ 
did  not  only  solidly  and  deliberately  confute  the  Pope's  said  usurped 
authority,  but  also  proved  the  said  marriage  between  the  king  and 
Queen  Catherine  not  to  be  good  nor  lawful.  To  which  book  of  Gar- 
diner's, Edmund  Bonner  (afterwards  Bishop  of  London)  prefixed  a 
preface  full  of  commendations,  enforcing  the  same  arguments,  and 
treating  the  Pope  with  rough  language :  yea,  and  the  same  Bishop 
Gardiner  (as  a  person  of  honour  tells  us)  declared,  moreover,  that 
the  king  was  bound  in  conscience  to  reform  his  Church.  That  the 
same  Bishop  Tunstal,  in  a  sermon  preached  about  the  same  time 
before  the  king,  on  Palm-Sunday,  proved,  by  manifest  grounds,  out 
of  the  Scripture,  the  Fathers,  and  Councils,  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
hath  no  such  authority  by  the  Word  of  God  committed  to  him  as  he 
doth  challenge,  and  treated  both  Cardinal  Pole  and  the  Pope  himself 
with  great  freedom  of  speech.  That,  besides  the  said  sermon,  the 
same  Bishop  Tunstal  did  join  with  John  Stokesley,  Bishop  of  London, 
in  writing  a  letter  to  the  said  Cardinal,  wherein  they  clearly  prove 
that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  hath  no  special  superiority  over  other 
bishops,  &c.  That  John  Longland,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  in  a  sermon 
on  Good-Friday,  1538,  before  the  king,  at  Greenwich,  did  zealously 
preach  on  the  king's  behalf  against  the  Pope's  usurped  supremacy." 
For  a  fuller  statement  of  this  matter  see  next  note. 


C.^Page  4. 

As  the  right  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  jurisdiction  in  England  is 
the  hinge  upon  which  the  whole  controversy  with  the  Romanists 
turns,  it  will  be  satisfactory  to  the  reader  to  see  some  of  the  proofs  of 
the  unanimity  with  which  that  right  was  denied,  when  the  question 
was  first  propounded,  and  while  yet  the  Church  of  England  was  in 
communion  with  the  see  of  Rome. 

In  the  first  place,  I  adduce  the  declaration  of  the  learned  Mr. 
Wharton  (as  quoted  by  Collier,)  in  his  Observations  on  Strype's 
Cranmer,  who  says,  "  that  the  renunciation  of  the  Pope  by  the  clergy 

*  Reference  is  made  to  the  bull  of  Paul  III.,  excommunicating  and  deposing 
Henry  VIII.     See  M.  M. 


49 

and  the  religions  was  general ;  that  the  originals  are  still  remaining 
in  the  Exchequer  ;  that  he  had  in  his  custody  no  less  than  a  hundred 
seventy  and  five  such  authentic  instruments,  transcribed  from  thence  ; 
that  these  transcripts  contain  the  subscriptions  of  all  the  bishops, 
chapters,  monasteries,  colleges,  hospitals,  etc.,  of  thirteen  dioceses, 
and  that,  to  his  certain  knowledge,  the  original  subscriptions  of  the 
remaining  dioceses  were  lodged  elsewhere." 

In  the  convocation  of  the  province  of  Canterbury,  the  question 
being  put  by  Archbishop  Cranmer,  both  houses  came  to  a  resolution 
that  the  Pope  had  no  greater  jurisdiction,  etc.,  than  any  other  foreign 
bishop.  In  the  lower  house,  four  voted  for  the  Pope's  authority,  and 
one  demurred.  At  the  same  time  an  instrument,  or  declaration  of 
the  sense  of  the  prelates  and  clergy  of  the  province  of  Canterbury 
was  drawn  and  signed  with  this  title, —  Quod  Romanus  Episcopus 
non  habet  majorem  jurisdictionem  sibl  a  Deo  collatam,  in  hoc  regno^ 
quam  alius  quivis  externus  Ejnscopus.  See  Collier's  Eccle.  Hist, 
fol.  ed.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  94,  who  refers  to  "  Journal  of  Convoc,  fol.  59." 

For  the  satisfaction  of  the  English  reader  I  translate  the  instru- 
ment, which  declares  the  judgment  of  the  Convocation  of  the  province 
of  York,  the  original  of  which  is  No.  2G  of  Collier's  Records  : — 

The  Judgment  of  the  Convocation  of  the  Province  of  Yorh^  rejecting 
the  Pope's  Authority. 

To  the  most  illustrious  and  excellent  Prince  and  Lord  Henry  VIII., 
by  the  grace  of  God  King  of  England  and  France,  Defender  of  the 
Faith,  and  Lord  of  Ireland,  Edward,  by  divine  permission,  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  Primate  and  Metropolitan  of  England,  in  Him, 
through  whom  kings  reign  and  princes  rule.  Greeting : 
We  do  your  Royal  Highness  to  wit,  by  tenor  of  these  presents, 
that,  according  to  the  mandate  of  your  Royal  Majesty,  before   the 
Bishops  and  Clergy  of  York,  in  a  holy  Provincial  Synod  of  the  Prov- 
ince, or  convocation  of  the  Bishops  and  Clergy  of  the  same  province 
of  York,  held  in  the  capitular  house  of  the  Metropolitan  Church,  at 
York,  on  the  fifth  day  of  the  month  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
MDXXXIV.,  now  current,  and  continued  from  day  to  day,  the  fol- 
lowing conclusion  was  proposed,  viz..  That  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  in 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  has  not  any  greater  jurisdiction  in  the  realm  of 
England  than  any  other  foreign  bishop.     And,  moreover,  on  the  part 
of  those  deputed  by  us  to  preside  in  the  same  synod,  the  Bishops  and 
Clergy  were  admonished,  asked,   and  required  to  confirm  and  cor- 
roborate said  conclusion  with  their  own  consent,  if  they  should  think 
and  judge  the  same  consonant  to  truth  and  not  repugnant  to  the 
Holy  Scriptures.     At  length,  the  said   Bishops  and  Clergy  of  the 
Provinceof  York  aforesaid,  after  diligent  eiUreatment  of  the  same, 
and  mature  deliberation,  unanimously  and  concordantly,none  of  them 
dissenting,  affirmed  the  aforesaid  conclusion  to  have  been  and  to  be 
true,  and  with  one  mind  consented  to  the  same. 

4 


50 

The  which,  all  and  singular,  and  by  tenor  of  these  presents,  we 
declare  and  signify  to  your  Koyal  Highness. 

In  proof  and  testimony  of  which,  all  and  singular,  we  have  caused 
our  seal  hereto  to  be  put. 

Done  at  our  Manor  of  Camodd,  on  the  first  day  of  June,  A.  D. 
MDXXXIV.,  and  in  the  third  year  of  our  consecration. 

The  judgment  of  the  University  of  Oxford  shows  the  care  and 
labor  with  which  the  question  was  considered,  and  the  solicitude  that 
was  felt  to  preserve  the  honor  of  the  University.  The  English  reader, 
I  hope,  will  not  be  displeased  if  I  translate  this  also,  referring  to  No. 
27  of  Collier's  Records  for  the  Latin  : — 

To  all  the  sons  of  Holy  Mother  Church,  to  whom  these  presents  may 
come,  John,  by  divine  permission,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  Chancellor 
of  the  University  of  Oxford  ;  also,  the  whole  Assembly  of  Doctors 
and  Masters  in  the  same,  Eegent  and  non-Regent,  in  Christ, 
Greeting  : 

Whereas  our  most  illustrious  and  mighty  Prince  and  Lord,  Henry 
VIII.,  by  the  grace  of  God,  King  of  England  and  France,  Defender 
of  the  Faith,  and  Lord  of  Ireland,  in  consequence  of  the  earnest  peti- 
tions and  complaints  of  his   subjects,  in  Parliament,  against  some 
intolerable  foreign  exactions,  and  of  some  controversies  in  relation  to 
the  power  and  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  of  various  and 
urgent  causes,  then  and  there  declared  against  the  same  Bishop,  has 
been  approached  and  solicited  to  consult  in  this  matter  for  the  good 
of  his  suljjects,  and  to  satisfy  their  complaints  ;  and  whereas  he  him- 
self, like  the  wise  king  of  Israel,  having  a  watchful  care  for  the  inter- 
ests of  his  subjects  in  this  realm,  and  profoundly  considering  in  what 
manner  he  may  establish  the  best  laws  for   his  realm,  and  cautious, 
above  all,  that  he  may  decree  nothing  against  Holy  Scripture  (which 
he  ever  hath  been  and  will  be  most  ready  to  defend,  even  to  death,) 
has,  of  his  own  mind  and  care,  publicly  and  solemnly  transmitted  to 
this  Academy  of  Oxford  the  following  question,  to  be  disputed  by 
its  Doctors  and  Masters  ;  viz..  Whether  the  Bishop  of  Rome  have  any 
greater  jurisdiction  conferred  on  him  by  Ood  in  Holy  Scripture  in  this 
realm  of  England  than  any  other  foreign  Bishop?    and  hath   com- 
manded that,  after  mature  deliberation  and  diligent  examination  had 
on  this  question,  we  certify,  under  the  common  seal  of  the  University, 
in  due  form  and  solemnity,  what,  in  our  judgment,  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures decree  on  this  subject : 

"  We,  therefore,  the  Chancellor,  Doctors  and  Masters  aforesaid, 
often  remembering  and  deeply  sensible  how  virtuous  and  holy  a 
thing  it  is,  how  consonant  to  our  profession,  and  due  to  submission, 
obedience,  and  reverence,  and  how  congruous  to  charity,  to  show 
plainly  the  way  of  Righteousness  and  Truth  to  as  many  as  desire  to 
walk  in  the  footsteps  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  with  secure  and 
quiet  conscience  to  stay  their  anchor  on  the  Law  of  God,  could  spare 
no  vigilance  that  in  so  just  and  honorable  an  application,  and  to  so 
great  a  Prince,  (under  whose  auspices  we  are  bound  to  obey  the  Su- 


51 

^reme  Ruler.)  we  might  give  all  the  satisfaction  in  our  power. 
Accordingly,  after  having  received  the  aforesaid  question,  with  all 
humility,  devotion  and  due  reverence,  the  Divines  of  our  Academy 
being  convoked  from  all  parts,  the  space  of  many  days  being  taken, 
and  a  sufficiently  ample  time  for  deliberation,  during  which,  with  all 
the  diligence  in  our  power,  with  zeal  for  justice,  with  religion  and 
with  conscience  uncorrupt,  we  thoroughly  examined  as  well  the  books 
of  Holy  Scripture,  as  the  most  approved  interpreters  of  the  same, 
often  and  often  consulting  them,  most  accurately  collating  and 
repeatedly  examining  them,  and  moreover,  after  solemn  disputations 
openly  and  publicly  held  and  celebrated,  have  at  length  all  come 
unanimously  to  this  opinion  and  have  consented  in  the  same  ;  viz. : 
That  the  Bishop  of  Rome  has  not  any  greater  jurisdiction  conferred 
on  him  by  God  iij  Holy  Scripture,  in  this  realm  of  England,  than 
any  other  foreign  Bishop. 

And  this,  our  assertion,  opinion  or  determination,  thus  deliberate- 
ly discussed  and  concluded  by  us,  according  to  the  requirement  of 
the  statutes  and  ordinances  of  this  our  University  ;  we  do  publicly, 
in  the  name  of  the  whole  Academy,  by  these  presents,  affirm  and  at- 
test as  true,  certain,  and  consonant  to  Holy  Scripture. 

In  proof  and  testimony  of  which,  all  and  singular,  we  have  caused 
these  letters  to  be  executed,  and  confirmed  by  the  common  seal  of 
our  University. 

Done  in  our  House  of  Convocation,  on  the  27th  day  of  June,  and 
in  the  year  of  our  Lord's  nativity  MDXXXIV. 

Next,  I  adduce  the  following  passage  from  "  The  Institution  of  a 
Christian  Man,"  published  in  1537,  and  commonly  called  the  Bish- 
op's Book,  The  preface  is  signed  by  twenty-one,  i.  e.,  by  all  the 
Bishops,  by  eight  Archdeacons,  (Bonner  included,  who  was  then  Arch, 
deacon  of  Leicester,)  and  by  seventeen  of  the  other  clergy.  The  ex- 
tract is  taken  from  the  chapter  "  On  the  Sacrament  of  Orders,"  pp. 
116—119  of  Oxford  ed.,  1825. 

Finally,  being  thus  declared,  not  only  what  is  the  virtue  and  effi- 
cacy, with  the  whole  institution  and  use  of  the  sacrament  of  holy 
orders,  but  also  in  what  things  consisteth  the  power  and  jurisdiction 
of  priests  and  bishops,  and  unto  what  limits  the  same  is  extended  by 
the  authority  of  the  gospel,  and  also  what  is  added  thereunto  by  the 
grants  and  sufferances,  or  permission  of  kings  and  princes ;  we  think 
it  convenient,  that  all  bishops  and  preachers  shall  instruct  and  teach 
the  people  committed  unto  their  spiritual  charge,  that  whereas  cer- 
tain men  do  imagine  and  affirm,  that  Christ  should  give  unto  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  power  and  authority,  not  only  to  be  head  and  gov- 
ernor of  all  priests  and  bishops  in  Christ's  Church,  but  also  to  have 
and  occupy  the  whole  monarchy  of  the  world  in  his  hands,  and  that 
he  may  thereby  lawfully  depose  kings  and  princes  from  their  realms, 
dominions  and  seigniories,  and  so  transfer  and  give  the  same  to 
such  persons  as  him  liketh  ;  that  is  utterly  false  and  untrue  ;  for 
Christ  never  gave  unto  St.  Peter,  or  unto  any  of  the  Apostles,  or 


52 

their  successors,  any  such  authority.  And  the  Apostles  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul  do  teach  and  command  that  all  Christian  people,  as 
well  priests  and  bishops,  as  others,  should  be  obedient  and  subject 
unto  the  princes  and  potentates  of  the  world,  although  they  were  in- 
fidels. And  as  for  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  it  was  many  hundred 
years  after  Christ  before  he  could  acquire  or  get  any  primacy  or 
governance  above  any  other  bishops  out  of  his  province  in  Italy. 
Sith  the  which  time  he  hath  ever  usurped  more  and  more.  And 
though  some  part  of  his  power  was  given  unto  him  by  the  consent  of 
the  emperors,  kings  and  princes,  and  by  the  consent  also  of  the  cler- 
gy in  general  councils  assembled ;  yet  surely  he  attained  the  most 
part  thereof  by  marvellous  subtilty  and  craft,  and  specially  by  col- 
luding with  great  kings  and  princes ;  sometimes  training  them  into 
his  devotion  by  pretence  and  color  of  holiness  and  sanctimony,  and 
sometimes  constraining  them  by  force  and  tyranny ;  whereby  the 
said  Bishops  of  Rome  aspired  and  arose  at  length  unto  such  great- 
ness in  strength  and  authority,  that  they  presumed  and  took  upon 
them  to  be  heads,  and  to  put  laws  by  their  own  authority,  not  only 
unto  all  other  bishops  within  Christendom,  but  also  unto  the  empe- 
rors, kings,  and  other  princes  and  lords  of  the  world,  and  that  under 
the  pretence  of  the  authority  committed  unto  them  by  the  gospel ; 
wherein  the  said  Bishops  of  Rome  do  not  only  abuse  and  pervert  the 
true  sense  and  meaning  of  Christ's  word,  but  they  do  also  clean  con- 
trary to  the  use  and  custom  of  the  primitive  Church,  and  also  do 
manifestly  violate  as  well  the  holy  canons  made  in  the  Church  imme- 
diately after  the  time  of  the  apostles,  as  also  the  decrees  and  consti- 
tutions made  in  that  behalf  by  the  holy  fathers  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  assembled  in  the  first  general  councils  ;*  and  finally  they  do 

*  In  connection  with  this  statement  the  reader  may  peruse  the  following 
canons,  which  I  transcribe  from  Hammond's  "Canons  of  the  Church  :" 

Apostolical  Canons,  No.  34. — The  bishops  of  every  nation  must  acknowledge 
him  who  is  first  among  them  ;  and  account  him  as  their  head,  and  do  nothing  of 
consequence  without  his  consent ;  but  each  may  do  those  things  which  concern 
his  own  Parish  and  the  country  places  which  belong  to  it.  But  neither  let  him 
[who  is  the  first]  do  anything  without  the  consent  of  all ;  for  so  there  will  be 
unanimity,  and  God  will  be  glorified  through  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
Father  through  the  Lord  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  even  to  the  Father,  the  Son,  and 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

Council  of  Nice,  Canon  4. — It  is  most  proper  that  a  bishop  should  be  constituted 
by  all  the  bishops  of  the  province;  but  if  this  be  difficult  on  account  of  some 
urgent  necessity,  or  the  length  of  the  way,  that  at  all  events  three  should  meet  at 
the  same  place,  those  who  arc  absent  also  giving  their  suffrages,  and  their  con- 
sent in  writing,  and  then  the  ordination  be  performed.  The  confirming,  how- 
ever, of  what  is  done  in  each  province,  belongs  to  the  metropolitan  of  it. 

Canon  6. — Let  the  ancient  customs  be  maintained  which  are  in  Egypt  and 
Lybia,  and  Pentapolis,  according  to  which  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria  has  author- 
ity over  all  those  places.  For  this  is  also  customary  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome. 
In  like  manner  in  Antioch,  and  in  the  other  Provinces,  the  privileges  are  to  be 
preserved  to  the  Churches.     But  this  is  clearly  to  be  understood,  that  if  any  one 


53 

transgress  their  own  profession,  made  in  their  creation.  For  all  the 
Bishops  of  Rome  always,  when  they  be  consecrated  and   made 

be  made  a  bishop  without  the  consent  of  the  metropolitan,  the  great  synod  de- 
clares that  he  shall  not  be  a  bishop.  If,  however,  two  or  three  bishops,  shall, 
from  private  contention,  oppose  the  common  choice  of  all  the  others,  it  being  a 
reasonable  one,  and  made  according  to  the  ecclesiastical  canons,  let  the  choice 
of  the  majority  hold  good. 

Council  ofAntioch,  Canon  9.— It  behooves  the  bishops  in  every  prox-ince  to  own 
him  who  presides  over  the  metropolis,  and  who  is  to  take  care  of  the  whole  pro- 
vince :  because  all  who  have  business  come  together  from  every  side  to  the 
metropolis.  Wherefore,  also,  it  has  been  decreed,  that  he  should  have  a  prece- 
dence of  rank,  and  that  the  other  bishops  should  do  nothingof  consequence  with- 
out him,  according  to  the  ancient  canon  which  we  have  received  from  our 
fathers  ;  or,  at  any  rate,  only  those  things  which  belong  to  each  particular 
|)arish,  and  the  districts  which  are  under  it.  For  each  bishop  is  to  have  author, 
ity  over  his  own  parish,  and  to  administer  it  with  that  piety  which  concerns 
every  one,  and  to  make  provision  for  all  the  district  which  is  under  his  city,  to 
ordain  presbyters  and  deacons,  and  to  determine  everything  with  judgment ;  but 
let  him  attempt  to  do  nothing  further  without  the  bishop  of  the  metropolis,  and 
let  him  not  do  anything  without  the  consent  of  the  others. 

Cou7icil  of  Constauiiuople,  Canon  2.— The  bishops  must  not  go  beyond  their 
dioceses,  and  enter  upon  churches  without  their  borders,  nor  bring  confusion" 
into  their  churches  ',  but,  according  to  the  canons,  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria  must 
have  the  sole  administration  of  the  affairs  of  Egypt,  and  the  Bishops  of  the  East 
must  administer  the  East  only,  the  privileges  which  were  assigned  to  the 
■Church  of  Antioch  by  the  canons  made  at  Nice  being  preserved  ;  and  the  bishops 
of  the  Asian  diocese  must  administer  the  affairs  of  the  Asian  only  ;  and  those 
of  the  Pontic  diocese,  the  affairs  of  the  Pontic  only  ;  and  those  of  Thrace,  the 
affairs  of  Thrace  only.  Moreover,  bishops  may  not,  without  being  called,  go 
beyond  the  bounds  of  their  diocese  for  the  purpose  of  ordaining,  or  any  other 
ecclesiastical  function.  The  above  written  canon  respecting  the  dioceses  being 
observed,  it  is  plain  that  the  synod  of  each  Province  must  administer  the  affairs 
of  the  Province,  according  to  what  was  decreed  at  Nice.  But  the  churches  of 
God  which  are  amongst  the  barbarians,  must  be  administered  according  to  the 
customs  of  the  Fathers  which  have  prevailed. 

Council  of  EphesKS,  C&non  8. — The  most  beloved  of  God,  and  our  fellow 
Bishop  Rheginus,  and  Zeno,  and  Evagrius,  the  most  religious  bishops  of  the 
Province  of  Cyprus,  who  were  with  him,  have  declared  unto  us  an  innovation 
which  has  been  introduced  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the  Church,  and  the  canons 
of  the  Holy  Fathers,  and  which  affects  the  liberty  of  all.  Wherefore,  since  evils 
which  affect  the  community  require  more  attention,  inasmuch  as  they  cause 
greater  hurt ;  and  especially  since  the  Bishop  of  Antioch  has  not  so  much  as 
followed  an  ancient  custom,  in  performing  ordination  in  Cyprus,  as  those 
most  religious  persons  who  have  come  to  the  Holy  Synod  have  informed  us, 
by  writing  and  by  word  of  mouth,  we  declare  that  they  who  preside  over  the 
Holy  Churches  which  are  in  Cyprus,  shall  preserve,  without  gainsaying  or  op- 
position, their  right  of  performing  by  themselves  the  ordinations'  of  the  most 
religious  bishops,  according  to  the  canons  of  the  Holy  Fathers  and  the  ancient 


54 

bishops  of  that  See,  do  make  a  solemn  profession  and  vow,*  that  they 
shall  inviolably  keep  and  observe  all  the  ordinances  made  in  the 
eight  first  general  councils,  among  the  which  it  is  specially  provided 
and  enacted,  that  all  causes  shall  be  finished  and  determined  within 

customs.  The  same  rule  shall  be  observed  in  all  the  other  dioceses  and  in  ths 
provinces  everywhere,  so  that  none  of  the  most  religious  bishops  shall  invade 
any  other  province,  which  has  not  heretofore  from  the  beginning  been  under  the 
hand  of  himself  or  his  predecessors.  But  if  any  one  has  so  invaded  a  province, 
and  brought  it  by  force  under  himself,  be  shall  restore  it,  that  the  canons  of  the 
Fathers  may  not  be  transgressed,  nor  the  pride  of  secular  dominion  be  privily 
introduced  under  the  appearance  of  a  sacred  office,  nor  we  lose  by  little,  the 
freedom  which  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  deliverer  of  all  men,  has  given  us  by 
his  own  blood.  The  Holy  and  CEcumenical  Synod  has  therefore  decreed  that 
the  rights  which  have  heretofore  and  from  the  beginning  belonged  to  each  Pro- 
vince, shall  be  preserved  to  it  pure  an-d  without  restraint,  according  to  the  custom 
which  has  prevailed  of  old  :  each  metropolitan  having  permission  to  take  a 
copy  of  the  things  now  transacted  for  his  own  security.  But  if  any  one  shall 
introduce  any  regulation  contrary  to  what  has  been  defined,  the  whole  Holy  and 
CEcumenical  Synod  has  decreed  that  it  shall  be  of  no  effect. 

Council  of  Chalcedon,  Canon  28.— We,  following  in  all  things  the  decisions 
of  the  Holy  Fathers,  and  acknowledging  the  canon  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty 
most  religious  bishops  which  has  just  been  read,  do  also  determine  and  decree 
the  same  things  respecting  the  privileges  of  the  most  holy  city  of  Con- 
stantinople, New  Rome.  For  the  Fathers  properly  gave  the  primacy  to  the 
throne  of  the  elder  Rome,  because  that  was  the  imperial  city.  And  the  one 
hundred  and  fifty  most  religious  bishops,  being  moved  with  the  same  intention, 
gave  equal  privileges  to  the  most  holy  throne  of  New  Rome,  judging,  with  reason, 
that  the  city  which  was  honored  with  the  sovereignty  and  senate,  and  which  en- 
joyed equal  privileges  with  the  elder  royal  Rome,  should  also  be  magnified  like 
her  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  being  the  second  after  her.  And  [we  also  decree] 
that  the  metropolitans  only  of  the  Pontic,  and  Asian,  and  Thracian  dioceses, 
and  moreover  the  bishops  of  the  aforesaid  dioceses  who  are  amongst  the  barba- 
rians, shall  be  ordained  by  the  above-mentioned  most  holy  throne  of  the  most 
holy  church  of  Constantinople  ;  each  metropolitan  of  the  aforesaid  dioceses 
ordaining  the  bishops  of  the  Province,  as  has  been  declared  by  the  divine  canons  ; 
but  the  metropolitans  themselves  of  the  said  dioceses,  shall,  as  has  been  said, 
be  ordained  by  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  the  proper  elections  been  made  ac- 
cording to  custom,  and  reported  to  him. 

*  The  vow  or  profession  referred  to,  may  be  seen  in  Gratian's  Corpus  Juris 
Canonici,  Distinctio  XVI.,  caput  8.,  ed.  Colonic  Munatiane,  1730. 

A-ae-iorilate  Romani  Pontificis  sa7icta  octo  consilia  roborantur. 

Sancta  octo  universalia  concilia,  id  est  primum  Nicjenum,  secundum  Constan- 
tinopolitanum,  tertium  Ephesinum,  quartum  Chalcedonense,  item  quintum  Con- 
stantinopolitanum  et  sextum,  item  Nicajnum  septimum,  octavum  quoque  Con- 
stantinopolitanum,  usque  ad  unum  apicem  immutilata  servare,  et  pan  honore  et 
veneralione  digna  habere,  et  qute  pradicaverunt  et  statuerunt  modis  omnibus 
sequi  et  prsedicare,  quaeque  condemnaverunt  ore  et  corde  condemnare  profiteor. 


55 

the  province  where  the  same  be  begun,  and  that  by  the  bishops  of 
the  same  province ;  and  that  no  bishops  shall  exercise  any  jurisdic- 
tion over  kings  and  bishops  as  the  Bishops  of  Rome  pretend  now  to 
have  over  the  same.     And  we  find  that  divers  good  fathers,  Bishops 
of  Rome,  did  greatly  reprove,  yea,  and  abhor,  (as  a  thing  clean  con- 
trary to  the  gospel,  and  the  decrees  of  the  Church,)  that  any  Bishop 
of  Rome,  or  elsewhere,  should  presume,  usurp,  or  take  upon  him  the 
title  or  name  of  the  universal  bishop,  or  of  the  head  of  all  priests,  or 
of  the   highest  priest,  or   any  such  like   title.     For   confirmation 
whereof,  it  is  out  of  all  doubt,  that  there  is  no  mention  made,  neither 
in  Scripture,  neither  in  the  writings  of  any  authentical  doctor,  or  au- 
thor of  the  Church,  being  within  the  time  of  the  apostles,  that  Christ 
did  ever  make  or  institute  any  distinction  or  dift'erence  to  be  in  the 
pre-eminence  of  power,  order  or  jurisdiction,  between  the  apostles 
themselves,  or  between  the  bishops  themselves ;  but  that  they  were 
all   equal   in  power,   order,   authority  and  jurisdiction.     And   that 
there  is  now,  and  sith  the  time  of  the  apostles,  any  such  diversity  of 
or  difterence  among  the  bishops,  it  was  devised  by  the  ancient  fathers 
of  the  primitive  Church,-  for  the  conservation  of  good  order  and  unity 
of  the  Catholic  Church ;  and  either  by  the  consent  and  authority,  or 
else  at  least  by  the  permission  and  sufferance  of  the  princes  and  civil 
powers  for  the  time  ruling.     For  the  said  fathers,  considering  the 
great  and  infinite  multitude  of  Christian  men,  so  largely  increased 
through  the  world,   and  taking   examples  of  the   Old   Testament, 
thought  it   expedient  to  make  an  order  of  degrees,  to  be  among 
bishops  and  spiritual  governors  of  the  Church  ;  and  so  ordained  some 
to  be  patriarchs,  some  to  be  primates,  some  to  be  metropolitans, 
some  to  be  archbishops,  some  to  be  bishops.     And  to  them  did 
limit  severally,  not  only  their  certain  dioceses  or  provinces,  wherein 
they  should  exercise  their  power,  and  not  exceed  the  same,  but  also 
certain  bounds  and  limits  of  their  jurisdiction  and  power.     Insomuch, 
that  whereas  in  the  time  of  the  apostles  it  was  lawful  indifferently  to 
all  bishops  (certain  of  them  assembling  themselves  together)  to  con- 
stitute and  consecrate  other  bishops  ;  the  said  fathers  restrained  the 
said  j)o\ver,  and  reserved  the  same  in  such  wise,  that  without  the 
consent  and  authority  of  the  metropolitan  or  archbishop,  no  bishop 
could  be  consecrated  within  any  province.     And  likewise  in  other 
cases  their  powers  were  also  restrained,  for  such  causes  as  were  then 
thought    unto   them  convenient.     Which  differences  the  said  holy 
fathers  thought  necessary  to  enact  and  establish,  by  their  decrees  and 
constitutions,  not  for  that  any  such  differences  were  prescribed  or 
established  in  the  gospel,  or  mentioned  in  any  canonical  writings  of 
the  apostles,  or  testified  by  any  ecclesiastical  writer  within  the  apos- 
tles' time ;  but  to  the  intent  that  thereby  contention,  strife,  variance, 

That  is — The  Holy  Eight  Universal  Councils,  viz.  :— the  first  of  Nice,  etc.,  I 
promise  to  keep  whole  and  inviolate  in  every  point,  and  to  hold  worthy  of  equal 
honor  and  veneration ;  to  follow  and  declare  by  every  means  what  they  have 
declared  or  ordained,  and  to  condemn  with  mouth  and  heart  what  they  have  con- 
demned. 


56 

and  schisms  or  division,  should  be  avoided,  and  the  Church  should  be 
preserved  in  good  order  and  concord. 

I  will  trouble  the  reader  with  but  one  more  extract,  and  it  shall  be 
the  united  testimony  of  the  inseparable  Gardiner  and  Bonner.  For 
on  the  publication  of  Paul  III.'s  bull,  excommunicating  and  deposing 
Henry  VIII.,  Gardiner,  in  a  work  entitled  "  Of  True  Obedience," 
came  out  manfully  in  defence  of  his  sovereign,  to  whom,  by  the 
way,  he  was,  as  Bramhall  tells  us,  a  "  very  near  relation  :"  (on  which 
the  editor  of  Bramhall  notes :  "  Gardiner  is  said  (see  Biogr.  Brit, 
art.  Gardiner,  note  B.)  to  have  been  the  illegitimate  son  of  a  Dr. 
Woodvill,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  who  was  brother  to  Elizabeth,  queen 
of  Edward  IV.,  and  grandmother  of  Henry  VIIL")  The  work  "  Of 
True  Obedience"  was  first  published  in  London  in  1534-35,  and  again 
in  1536  at  Hamburg,  with  a  preface  by  Bonner.  In  this  work  Gardi- 
ner says  :  "  No  foreign  bishop  hath  authority  among  us.  *  *  * 
All  sorts  of  people  are  agreed  with  u%  upon  this  point  with 
most   steadfast  consent,    that    no  manner    of    person   bred    or 

BROUGHT  UP  IN  EnGLAND  HATH  AUGHT  TO  DO  WITH  THEM." 

I  give  the  quotation  as  I  find  it  in  Bramhall's  Works,  vol.  i,  p. 
121,  of  the  Oxford  edition  of  1842;  the  learned  editor  of  which  in- 
forms us  in  a  note,  that  the  passages  quoted  by  Bramhall,  from 
Gardiner's  book,  are  in  pp.  812,  817,  of  the  reprint  of  it  (with  Bon- 
ner's preface)  in  Brown's  appendix  to  Gratius,  Fascicul,  Rer.  Expe- 
tend,  et  Fugiend.  London,  1690."  It  is  needless  to  refer  to 
Tonstall,  Longland,  (see  the  extract  from  Lindsay  in  the  previous 
note)  and  Bekcnshaw,  Roman  Catholics  of  that  age,  who  have  left  tes- 
timonies to  the  same  effect.  For  the  above  citations  and  references 
make  it  certain,  at  least  to  my  mind,  that  the  Pope's  supremacy  was 
rejected  in  England,  not  (as  the  Romanists  pretend)  under  fear  of  a 
Fremunire,  but  from  a  deep  conviction  and  long  experience  of  its 
evils,  and  with  the  hearty  and  unanimous  consent  of  all  ranks  and 
classes  of  men  in  the  kingdom. 

If  my  subject  required  me  to  extend  my  remarks  to  the  estimation 
in  which  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was,  at  that  time,  held  in  Ireland,  the 
following  extract  from  Bramhall  (who  was  born  in  the  reign  of  Eliza- 
beth, and  was  at  the  time  of  his  death  Primate  and  Metropolitan  of 
;all  Ireland)  might  furnish  a  text  for  an  instructive  discourse  : 

■"  And  to  shew  yet  farther,  that  Ireland  was  unanimous  herein  with 
'England,  we  find  in  the  three  and  thirtieth  year  of  Henry  the  Eiglith, 
which  was  before  all  thoughts  of  reformation,  not  the  Irish  only,  as 
the  O'Neals,  O'Reillys,  O'Briens,  O'Carrols,  &c.,  but  also  the  Eng- 
.iish  families,  as  the  Desmonds,  Barries,  Roches,  Bourkes,  whose  pos- 


57 


terities  do  still  continue  zealous  Romanists,  did  make  their  submis- 
sions by  indenture  to  Sir  Anthony  Sellenger,  then  chief  governor  of 
that  kingdom,  wherein  they  '  acknowledged  King  Henry  to  be  their 
sovereign  lord,  and  confessed  the  king's  supreniacy  in  all  causes,  and^ 
utterly  renounced  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Pope.'  So  the  Bishop  of 
Winchester  might  well  «ay,  that  there  was  an  universal  and  steadfast 
consent  in  the  separation  from  Ptome."     (Bram.  vol.  i.,  p.  122.) 


D.—Par/e  5. 

In  all  this,  if  we  except  the  word  "  Head"  of  the  Church,  as  ap- 
plied to  the  King,  there  was  really  nothing  new.     The  Kings  of 
England,  from  time  immemorial,  had  been  called  the  Protectors  and 
Tutors  (Guardians)  of  the  Church;  and  the  statute  (26  Henry  VIII.) 
which  empowered  the  King  to  redress  and  reform  abuses,  was  not 
introductory  of  a  new  law,  but  declaratory  of  the  old  law  of  the  King- 
dom.    "  Our  Kings,"  says  Sir  Roger  Twisden,  "were  originally  en- 
dued with  authority  to  cause  the  English  Church  to  be  reformed  by  the 
advice  of  their  Bishops,  and  other  of  the  Clergy,  as  agreeing  with 
the  practice  of  all  ages.     Eor  who  introduced  the  opinion  of  Tran- 
substantiatiou  ?  made  it  an  article  of  Faith  ?  barred  the  Lay  of  the 
Cup?  Priests  of  marriage?  who  restored  the  Mass  in  Queen  Mary's 
days,  before  any  reconciliation  made  with  Rome  ? — but  the  Ecclesi- 
astics of  this  Kingdom  under  the  Prince  for  the  time  being,  who 
commanded  or  connived  at  it."     And  if  the  King  and  Parliament, 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Bishops  and  Clergy,  restored  the 
Cup  to  the  Laity  and  enacted  other  reforms  by  law,  where  was  the 
departure  from  ancient  usage  ?     The  particular  acts,  indeed,  were 
of  a  different  nature,  but  the  principle  of  procedure  was  the  same. 
And  yet  these  proceedings  drew  from  Paul  III.,  the  then  Bishop  of 
Rome,  one  of  the  most  furious  bulls  that   ever  issued  from  the 
Vatican.     In  this  bull  (for  a  further  account  of  which  see  Appendix 
MM.)  the  Pope  denounces  Henry  as  a  heretic  and  schismatic,  because 
he  had  denied  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  be  the  Head  of  the  Church 
and  Vicar  of  Christ,  and  declared  himself  to  be  the  Head  of  the 
Church.     The  King,  however,  as  Twisden  remarks,  had  simply  done 
neither  the  one  nor  the  other.     He  had  not  denied  that  the  Pope 
was  the  Head  of  the  Church  in  his  own  dominions,  nor  in  France, 
Spain,  or  any  other  country  that,  chose  to  acknowledge  him  in  that 
character.     He  had  simply  denied  (and  that  with  the  consent  and 


58 

approbation  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Bishops  and  Clergy  of  his 
Kingdom,)  that  the  Pope  was  the  Head  of  the  Church  throughout  all 
the  world,  and  consequently  in  the  realm  of  England.  He  had  not 
denied  the  Pope  to  be  the  Vicar  of  Christ  in  his  own  diocese  — for 
such,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  are  all 
bishops  in  their  respective  dioceses.  Neither  had  he  declared  him- 
self to  be  the  Head  of  the  Church  of  England  in  such  a  sense  as  to 
be  the  source  of  any  merely  spiritual  jurisdiction,  but  only  in  such 
a  sense  as  to  be  the  source  (exclusively  of  all  foreign  power)  of 
all  outioard  and  coercive  jurisdiction  in  the  realm  of  England. 

To  perceive  the  necessity  of  denying  this  supremacy  to  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  and  of  restoring  it  to  the  crown,  (or  to  the  people,  as  we 
would  say,  if  the  government  of  England  had  been  of  the  republican 
and  not  of  the  monarchical  kind,)  it  is  proper  to  advert  to  the  theory 
of  the  Roman  divines  on  the  relation  of  the  spiritual  and  temporal 
pov/ers.  "The  temporal  power,"  says  one  of  the  ablest  and  most 
guarded  of  their  mimber,  "  has  its  princes,  its  laws  and  its  judg- 
ments;  and  the  spiritual  power  in  like  manner  has  its  bishops,  its 
canons  and  its  judgments.  The  end  proposed  by  the  former  is  tem- 
poral peace;  the  end  proposed  by  the  latter  is  everlasting  salvation. 
Sometimes  these  powers  are  found  separate,  as  formerly  in  the  age 
of  the  apostles  ;  and  at  other  times,  as  now,  they  are  found  conjoined. 
When  the  spiritual  and  temporal  powers  are  conjoined,  they  make 
one  body,  and  ought  therefore  to  be  connected,  and  the  inferior  s\ab- 
jected  and  subordinated  to  the  superior.  And  so  the  spiritual  does 
not  mix  itself  with  temporal  affairs,  but  suffers  them  all  to  proceed 
as  they  did  before  they  were  conjoined,  provided  they  do  not  ob- 
struct the  end  of  the  spiritual  power  or  are  not  necessary  for  the  at- 
tainment of  this  end.  But  if  any  such  thing  happen,  the  sjnritual 
power  can  and  ought  to  coerce  the  temporal  by  every  tvay  and  means 
which  shall  seem  necessary  to  its  end."* 

From  this  moderate  theory  (for  moderate  it  is  in  comparison  with 

*  Ita  prorsus  politica  potestas  habet  suos  principes,  leges,  judicia-,  &c.,  et  simi- 
liter Ecclesiastica  suos  Episcopos,  canones,  judicia.  Ilia  habet  pro  fine,  tempo- 
ralem  paeem,  ista  salutem  aeternam.  Inveniuntur  quandoquc  separate, 
ut  olim  tempore  Apostolorum,  quandoque  conjunctse,  ut  nunc.  Quando  autem 
sunt  conjunctae  unum  corpus  efRciunt,  ideoque  debent  esse  connexae,  et  in- 
ferior superiori  subjecta  et  subordinata.  Itaque  spiritualis  non  se  miscet  tem- 
poralibus  negotiis,  sed  sinit  omnia  procedere,  sicut  antequam  essent  conjunc- 
tffi,  dummodo  non  obsint  fini  spiritual!  aut  non  sint  necessaria  ad  eum  conse- 
quenduro.  Si  autem  tale  quid  accidat,  spiritualis  potestas  potest  et  debet 
coercere  temporalem  omni  ratione,  ac  via,  quEe  ad  id  necessaria  esse  videbitur. — 
Bellar.  de  Romano.  Pont.  Lib.  V.,  C.  7. 


59 

the  extravagant  theories  of  the  canonists)  the  reader  may  easily  con- 
jecture  the  state  of  the  English  nation  while  it  acknowledged  its 
subjection  to  a  spiritual  coercive  power,  the  source  and  fountain  of 
which  was  at  Rome.  The  results  of  this  unnatural  relation  are  thus 
summed  up  by  Brarahall,  who  has  adduced  a  mass  of  facts  to  show 
that  these  and  not  the  imperious  temper  of  Henry  VIII.  were. the 
real  grounds  of  renouncing  the  papal  supremacy  in  England. 

"  First.  The  most  intolerable  extortions  of  the  Roman  Court,  com- 
mitted from  age  to  age  without  hope  of  remedy, 

"  Secondly.  Their  most  unjust  usurpations  of  all  rights,  civil,  ec- 
clesiastical, sacred  and  profane,  of  all  orders  of  men,  kings,  nobles, 
bishops,  &c. 

"  Thirdly.  The  malignant  influence  and  effects  of  this  foreign  juris- 
diction, destructive  to  the  right  ends  of  ecclesiastical  discipline,  pro- 
ducing disunion  m  the  realm,  factions  and  animosities  between  the 
crown  and  the  mitre,  intestine  discords  between  the  king  and  his 
barons,  bad  intelligence  with  neighbor  princes,  and  foreign  wars. 

"  Fourthly.  Alist  of  other  inconveniences,  or  rather  mischiefs,  that 
did  flow  from  thence ;  as,  to  be  daily  subject  to  have  new  articles  of 
Faith  obtruded  upon  them,  to  be  exposed  to  manifest  peril  of  idola- 
try, to  forsake  the  communion  of  three  parts  of  Christendom,  to  ap- 
prove the  Pope's  rebellion  against  general  councils,  and  to  have  their 
bishops  take  an  oath — contrary  to  their  oath  of  allegiance — to  maintain 
the  Pope  in  his  rebellious  usurpations." 

One  unhappy  eftect  of  the  extravagant  claims,  before  the  Reforma- 
tion, in  behalf  of  the  spiritual  power,  was  to  beget  a  reaction  after- 
wards towards  the  opposite  extreme.  Hence  the  Hobbian,  or,  as  it 
is  more  commonly  called  {euphoniae  gratia,  I  suppose,  for  the  infidel 
of  Malmesbury  was  its  sturdiest  patron,  and  his  name  fits  it  better 
than  that  of  the  German  physician),  the  Erastian  theory  ;  which  re- 
gards the  Church  as  the  mere  creature  of  the  state.  It  must  be  con- 
fessed  that  this  theory,  though  it  has  never  had  the  effect  to  deprive 
the  Church  of  its  spiritual  powers,  has  yet  had  a  disastrous  influence. 
It  has  choked  the  true  principles  of  the  Church  as  maintained  from 
the  Reformation  to  the  Revolution ;  it  has  fostered  a  distrust  and 
jealousy  of  all  who  assert  her  divine  constitution  as  a  body  politic 
originally  distinct  from  the  state  ;  and  it  has  shown  itself  in  a  relent- 
less determination  to  keep  her  down  to  the  rigorous  letter  of  laws, 
(originally  enacted  for  her  protection  as  well  as  the  state's  against 
the  evils  of  a  foreign  jurisdiction,)  which,  though  they  leave  unim- 
paired her  spiritual  powers,  so  cripple  her  in  the  use  of  these  powers. 


60 

as  to  render  them  inoperative  in  some  important  matters  of  exterior 
jurisdiction. 

The  theory  of  the  Church  of  England  divines  on  this  subject,  if 
I  rightly  understand  it,  is  simple.  They  regard  the  state  and  the 
Church  as  two  separate  and  concurring  bodies,  each  capable  of  pre- 
serving its  own  continuity,  and  of  existing  independently  the  one  on 
the  other,  but  both  uniting  and  helping  each  other  in  the  attain- 
ment of  their  respective  ends.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  Church 
they  understand  to  be  merely  spiritual,  operating  outwardly,  in- 
deed, (unless  for  wise  ends  restrained  by  the  state,)  in  synods, 
judicatories,  canons,  &c.,  but  wholly  debari-ed,  by  its  divine  con- 
stitution, from  all  attempts  to  give  effect  to  its  decisions  and 
enactments  by  any  other  than  merely  spiritual  censures  or  penalties. 
All  coercive  jurisdiction  even  in  spiritual  matters  and  over  spiritual 
persons  they  refer  exclusively  to  the  state.  The  Church,  they  say? 
may  make  canons  and  press  them  on  the  consciences  of  her  mem- 
bers ;  but  only  the  state  can  make  laws  and  guard  them  by  compul" 
sory  penalties.  Thus  distinct  and  yet  concurrent,  they  tell  us,  were 
Church  and  state  under  Constantine,  and  for  several  hundred  years 
afterwards ;  and  the  denial  of  the  papal  supremacy,  and  the  expul- 
sion of  the  canon  law  from  England,  was  a  return  of  the  tvvo  bodies 
'  to  their  former  relations  ;  the  Church,  i.  e.,  the  persons  and  goods  of 
its  members,  becoming  subject  in  all  things  (saving  faith  and  a  good 
conscience)  to  the  temporal  and  coercive  power  of  the  state,  and  so 
rendering  unto  Csesar  the  things  which  are  Caesar's  ;  and  the  state 
conceding  all  merely  spiritual  power  to  the  Church,  keeping  her  in 
the  exercise  of  it  to  the  great  ends  for  which  it  was  given,  and  aiding 
and  protecting  her  in  the  pursuit  of  those  ends. 

The  fusion  of  these  two  bodies  into  one,  under  the  supreme  head- 
ship of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  was  not  brought  about  without  a  long 
and  violent  struggle.  In  flict,  as  stated  in  the  commencement  of  this 
note,  statutes  excluding  the  Pope  and  his  agents  from  the  kingdom 
had  been  enacted  long  before  the  Reformation.  Of  this  a  practical 
proof  was  given  in  the  case  of  Lalor,  a  papal  emissary  in  the  times 
of  James  I ,  whose  indictment  was  framed  in  accordance  with  ancient 
statutes,  for  the  very  purpose  of  showing  that"  the  denial  of  the 
Pope's  supremacy  was  so  far  from  being  a  novelty  that  it  was  in  fact 
the  old  law  of  the  realm.  This  case  is  also  remarkable  as  having 
given  occasion  to  the  famous  fifth  report  of  Sir  Edward  Coke,  in 
which  he  reviews  the  struggle  for  the  supremacy  ;  an  extract  from 
which  is  given  at  the  end  of  this  note. 


61 

lam  awai'e  that  the  statute  (26  Henry  VIIL,  cap.  1.)  entitling  the 
king  the  head  of  the  English  Church  (and  quoted  in  the  passage  to 
which  this  note  refers)  enacts  that  the  king  shall  have  power  to  re- 
form "  all  such  errors,  heresies,  abuses,  &c.,  whatsoever,  which  by 
any  manner  of  spiritual  authority  may  be  lawfully  reformed,"  &c. ; 
and  I  am  aware  also  that  both  Papists  and  Puritans  (who  are  tied 
together,  like  Samson's  foxes,  with  firebrands  at  their  tails,  and  their 
heads  diverse  ways  for  the  destruction  of  the  Church  of  England) 
have  thence  inferred  that  the  crown  claims  to  be  the  source  from 
which  the  bishops  derive  their  office  and  all  their  jurisdiction,  even 
the  power  of  the  keys.     The  Puritans  made  it  one  of  their  charges 
against  Archbishop  Laud,  that  "  he  had  said  he  received  his  jurisdic- 
tion from  God  and  from  Christ,  contrary  to  an  act  of  Parliament  (the 
act  under  consideration),  which  says  bishops  derive  their  jurisdiction 
from  the  king.''''     But  the  defence  of  the  brave  old  bishop  on  this,  as 
on  other  points,  was  prompt  and  conclusive.     "  That  statute,"  he 
tells  his  truculent  judges,  "speaks  plainly  of  jurisdiction  in  foro 
contentloso,  and  places  of  judicature,   and  no  other.     And  all  their 
forensical  jurisdiction,  &c.,  all  bishops  in  England  derive  from  the 
crown.     But  my  order,  my  calling,  my  jurisdiction  in  foro  conscien- 
tlce,  that  is,  from  God  and  by  divine  and  apostolical  right,*     The  juris- 
diction mentioned  in  the  statute  is  plainly  of  a  temporal  nature, 
and   is   called   spiritual^  because    it  deals  with   ecclesiastical   per- 
sons  and   causes,  and  to  distinguish   it  from  the  merely   temporal 
power  which  deals  with  persons  and  things  as  they  have  reference  to 
a  common  and  not  to  a  sacred  use.     The  causes  referred   to  (and 
mentioned  soon  after  in  the  same  statute)  are  causes  testamentary, 
causes  matrimonial,  and  divorces,  tithes,  oblations,  obventions,  &c., 
which,  with  the  dispensations  and  other  impositions,  had  been  a  drain 
to  the  kingdom  and  a  source  of  enormous  revenue  to  the  Bishop  of 
Rome.     The  purpose  of  this  and  the  like  statutes  is  to  exclude  the 
power  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  over  ecclesiastics  and  causes  of  this  kind, 
and  to  restore  that  power  to  the  crown  ;  and  they  are  enacted  under 
the  proviso  which  in  one  of  them  is  expressed,  that  neither  "  this  act, 
nor  any  thing  or  things  therein  contained,  shall  be  hereafter  interpreted 
and  expounded  that  your  grace,  your  nobles  and  subjects,  intend  by 
the   same   to  decline  or  vary   from  the  congregation    of  Christ's 
Church  in  anything  concerning  the  very  articles  of  the  Catholic  faith 
of  Christendom,  or  any  other  things  declared  by  Holy  Scriptures,  and 
the  Word  of  God,  necessary  to  yours  and  their  salvation ;  but  only 

*  Wharton's  Troubles  and  Trials  of  Laud.    Folio,  London,  A.  D.  1695,  p.  309. 


62 


to  make  an  ordinance,  by  policies  necessary  and  convenient,  to  re- 
press vice,  and  for  the  good  conservation  of  the  realm  in  peace, 
amity  and  tranquillity,  from  ravin  and  spoil ;  enforcing  much  the 
old  ancient  customs  of  this  realm  in  that  behalf,  not  minding  to  seek 
for  any  relief,  or  succors,  or  remedies  for  any  worldly  things,  but 
within  this  realm,  at  the  hands  of  your  highness,  your  heirs  and  suc- 
cessors, kings  of  this  realm ;  which  have  sought  to  have  an  imperial 
power  and  authority  in  the  same,  and  not  obliged  in  any  worldly 
causes  to  any  superior." 

To  repel  this  "  sinister  persuasion  of  evil-minded  persons,"  as  it 
is  termed  in  the  disclaimer  of  Elizabeth,  of  an  intention  on  the  part 
of  the  crown  to  assume  to  itself  that  authority  which  is  merely 
spiritual,  I  need  only  refer  to  the  form  of  consecration  contained 
in  the  Ordinal,  which  has  been  repeatedly  confirmed  by  parliamenta- 
ry statutes,  first  by  the  act  of  Edward  VI.,  annexing  the  Ordinal  to 
the  Prayer  Book,  and  afterwards  by  the  three  several  acts  of  Uni- 
formity. For  the  form  of  consecration,  as  Bishop  Gibson  and  others 
have  remarked,  expressly  refers  the  jurisdiction  of  the  English 
Bishops  to  a  two-fold  original ;  viz. :  the  Word  of  God  and  the  Laws 
of  the  Land;  and  plainly  recognizes  a  power  of  jurisdiction  derived 
to  Bishops  by  divine  right,  i.  e.,  by  the  Word  of  God,  before  and 
independently  of  that  which  is  conferred  on  them  by  the  laws  of  the 
realm.  The  part  referred  to  is  the  question  of  the  Archbishop  to  the^ 
Bishop  elect,  and  the  answer  thereto,  before  the  imposition  of  hands  : 

"  Will  you  maintain  and  set  forward,  as  much  as  shall  lie  in  you, 
quietness,  love  and  peace  among  all  men  ;  and  such  as  be  unjust  and 
disobedient  and  criminous  within  your  diocese,  correct  and  punish, 
according  to  such  authority  as  you  have  by  God's  Word,  and  as  to 
you  shall  be  committed  by  the  ordinance  of  this  realm?  Answer. 
I  will  do  so  by  the  help  of  God." 

From  all  which  it  appears,  I  apprehend,  that  the  spiritual  jurisdic- 
tion, mentioned  in  the  statute,  refers  only  to  that  exterior  and  coer- 
cive jurisdiction,  which  belongs  to  the  sovereign  authority  of  every 
nation,  as  they  say  in  Great  Britain,  to  the  crown,  or  as  we  say  here, 
to  the  people ;  which,  though  for  awhile  usurped  by  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  was  restored  at  the  Reformation  to  the  crown ;  and  which  is 
•clearly  distinguished,  on  the  one  hand,  in  its  nature,  end  and  origin, 
from  that  power  of  jurisdiction  which  is  merely  spiritual ;  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  in  its  name,  and  in  the  objects  on  which  it  is  exercised, 
from  that  which  is  merely  temporal. 

P.  S.  I  give  an  extract  from  the  fifth  report  of  Sir  Edward  Coke, 


63 

above  referred  to,  for  the  sake  of  the  facts  which  it  states,  and  which 
are  not  invalidated  by  an  occasional  sentiment  or  expression  betray- 
ing the  Erastianism  of  the  author  : 

For,  albeit,  the  kings  of  England  were  absolute  emperors  within 
their  dominions,  and  had  under  them  as  learned  a  prelacy  and  clergy, 
as  valiant  and  prudent  a  nobility,  as  free  and  wealthy  a  commonalty, 
as  any  was  then  in  Christendom ;  yet  if  we  look  into  the  stories  and 
records  of  these  two  imperial  kingdoms,  we  shall  find  that  if  these 
laws  of  provision  and  praemunire  had  not  been  made,  they  had  lost 
the  name  of  imperial,  and  of  kingdoms  too,  and  had  been  long  since 
made  tributary  provinces  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  or  rather  part  of 
St.  Peter's  patrimony  in  demesne.     Our  kings  had  had  their  sceptres 
wrested  out  of  their  hands,  their  crowns  spurned  oft'  from  their  heads, 
their  necks  trod  upon ;  they  had  been  made  laquies  or   footmen  to 
the  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  some  of  the  emperors  and  French  kings 
were  ;   our  prelates  had  been  made  his   chaplains  and   clerks,  our 
nobility  his  vassals  and  servants,  our  commons  his  slaves  and  villains, 
if  these  acts  of  manumission  had  not  freed  them.     In  a  word,  before 
the  making  of  these  laws,  the  flourishing  crown  and  commonwealth 
of  England  was  in  extreme  danger  to  have  been  brought  into  most 
miserable  servitude  and  slavery,  under  color  of  religion  and  devo- 
tion to  the  See  of  Rome.     And  this  was  not  only  seen  and  felt  by 
the  king,  and  much  repined  at  and  protested  against  by  the  nobility, 
but  the  commons,  the  general  multitude  of  the  subjects,  did  exclaim 
and  cry  out  upon  it.     For  the  commons  of  England  may  be  an  ex- 
ample unto  all  other  subjects  in  the  world  in  this,  that  they  have 
ever  been  tender  and  sensible  of  the  wrongs  and  dishonors  offered 
unto  their  kings,  and  have  ever  contended  to  uphold  and  maintain 
their  honor  and  sovereignty.     And  their  faith  and  loyalty  have  been 
generally  such,  (though  every  age  hath  brought  forth  some  particular 
monsters  of  disloyalty,)  as  no  pretence  of  zeal  or  religion  could  ever 
withdraw  the  greater  part  of  the  subjects  to  submit  themselves  to  a 
foreign  yoke,  no,  not  when  popery  was  in  her  height  and  exaltation  ; 
whereof  this  act  and  divers  others  of  the  same  kind  are  clear  and 
manifest  testimonies.     For  this  act  of  16  Rich.  II.  was  made  at  the 
prayer  of  the  commons  ;  which  prayer  they  make  not  for  themselves, 
neither  show  they  their  own  self-love  therein,  (as  in  other  bills  which 
contain  their  grievances,)  but  their  love  and  zeal  to  the  king  and  his 
crown.     When  after  the  Norman  Conquest  they  importuned  their 
kings  for  the  great  charter,  they  sought  their  own  liberties  ;  and  in 
other  bills    preferred   commonly  by  the  commons  against  shriefs, 
escheators,  purveyors,  or  the  like,  they  seek  their  own  profit  and 
ease.     But  here  their  petition  is  to  the  king,  to  make  a  law  for  the 
defence  and  maintenance  of  his  own  honor.     They  complain,  that  by 
bulls  and  processes  from  Rome,  the  king  is  deprived  of  that  jurisdic- 
tion which  belongs  of  right  to  his  imperial  crown  ;  that  the  king  doth 
lose  the  service  and  council  of  his  prelates  and  learned   men   by 
translations  made  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome ;  that  the  king's  laws  are 
defeated  at  his  will,  the  treasure  of  the  realm  is  exhausted  and  ex- 


64 

ported  to  enrich  his  court ;  and  that  by  those  means  the  crown  of 
England  which  hath  ever  been  free,  and  subject  unto  none,  but  im- 
mediately unto  God,  should  be  submitted  unto  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
to  the  utter  destruction  of  the  king  and  the  whole  realm  ;  which  God 
defend,  say  they  ;  and  thereupon,  out  of  their  exceeding  zeal  and 
fervency,  they  offer  to  live  and  die  with  the  king  in  defence  of  the 
liberties  of  the  crown.  And  lastly,  they  pray  and  require  the  king, 
by  way  of  justice,  to  examine  all  the  lords  in  Parliament,  what  they 
thought  of  these  manifest  wrongs  and  usurpations,  and  whether  they 
would  stand  with  the  king  in  defence  of  his  royal  liberties,  or  no. 
Which  the  king  did  according  to  their  petition ;  and  the  lords  spirit- 
ual and  temporal  did  all  answer,  that  these  usurpations  of  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  were  against  the  liberties  of  the  crown,  and  that  they  were 
all  bound  by  their  allegiance  to  stand  with  the  king,  and  to  maintain 
his  honor  and  prerogative.  And  thereupon  it  was  enacted  with  a  full 
consent  of  the  three  estates,  that  such  as  should  purchase  in  the  court 
of  Rome,  or  elsewhere,  any  bulls  or  processes,  or  other  things  which 
might  touch  the  king  in  his  crown  and  dignity  royal,  and  such  as 
should  bring  them  into  the  realm,  and  such  as  should  receive  them, 
publish  them,  or  execute  them,  they,  their  notaries,  proctors,  main- 
tainers  and  counsellors,  should  be  all  out  of  the  king's  protection, 
their  lands  and  goods  forfeited  to  the  king,  their  bodies  attached  if 
they  might  be  found,  or  else  process  of  j9ra6?«M?if/'e  facias  to  be 
awarded  against  them.  Upon  these  motives,  and  with  this  affection 
and  zeal  of  the  people,  was  the  statute  of  16  Rich.  II.  made,  where- 
upon we  have  framed  our  indictment. 

Now  let  us  look  higher,  and  see  whether  the  former  laws  made  by 
King  Edward  I.  and  King  Edward  111.  against  the  usurpation  of  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  were  not  grounded  upon  the  like  cause  and  reason. 
The  statute  of  38  Edw.  111.,  cap.  I,  expressing  the  mischiefs  that  did 
arise  by  breves  of  citation,  which  drew  the  bodies  of  the  people,  and 
by  bulls  of  provision  and  reservation  of  ecclesiastical  benefits,  which 
drew  the  wealth  of  the  realm  to  the  court  of  Rome,  doth  declare,  that 
by  these  means  the  ancient  laws,  customs  and  franchises  of  the  realm 
were  confounded,  the  crown  of  our  sovereign  lord,  the  king,  dimin- 
ished, and  his  person  falsely  defamed,  the  treasure  and  riches  of  the 
land  carried  away,  the  subjects  of  the  realm  molested  and  impover- 
ished, the  benefices  of  holy  Church  wasted  and  destroyed,  divine 
service,  hospitality,  alms-deeds  and  other  works  of  charity  neglected. 

Again,  27  Edw.  III.,  cap.  1,  upon  the  grievous  and  clamorous  com- 
plaint (for  that  phrase  is  here  used)  of  the  great  men  and  commons 
touching  citations  and  provisions,  it  is  enacted,  that  the  offenders 
shall  forfeit  their  lands,  goods  and  chattels,  and  that  their  bodies  be 
imprisoned  and  ransomed  at  the  king's  will. 

But  in  the  statute  25  Edw.  III.,  wherein  the  first  law  against  pro- 
visors  made,  25  Edw.  I.,  is  recited,  there  is  a  larger  declaration  of 
these  inconveniences  than  in  the  two  last  acts  before  nientioned. 
For  there  all  the  commons  of  the  realm  do  grievously  complain,  that 
whereas  the  holy  Church  of  England  was  first  founded  in  estate  of 
prelacy  by  the  kings  and  nobility  of  that  realm,  and  by  them  en- 


65 

dowed  with  great  possessions  and  revenues  in  lands,  rents  and  ad- 
vowsons,  to  the  end  the  people  might  be  informed  in  religion, 
hospitality  might  be  kept,  and  other  works  of  charity  might  be 
exercised  within  the  realm  ;  and  whereas  the  king  and  other  founders 
of  the  said  prelacies  were  the  rightful  patrons  and  advowees  thereof, 
and  upon  avoidance  of  such  ecclesiastical  promotions  had  power  to 
advance  thereunto  their  kinsmen,  friends  and  other  learned  men  of 
the  birth  of  that  realm,  which  being  so  advanced  became  able  and 
worthy  persons  to  serve  the  king  in  council,  and  other  places  in  the 
commonweal ;  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  usurping  the  seignory  of  such 
possessions  and  benefices,  did  give  and  grant  the  same  to  aliens, 
which  did  never  dwell  in  England,  and  to  cardinals,  which  might  not 
dwell  there,  as  if  he  were  rightful  patron  of  those  benefices  ;  whereas 
by  the  law  of  England  he  never  had  right  to  the  patronage  thereof; 
whereby  in  short  time  all  the  sf)iritual  promotions  in  the  realm 
would  be  engrossed  into  the  hands  of  strangers,  canonical  elections 
of  prelates  would  be  abolished,  works  of  charity  would  cease,  the 
founders  and  true  patrons  of  churches  would  be  disinherited,  the 
king's  council  would  be  weakened,  the  whole  kingdom  impoverished, 
and  the  laws  and  rights  of  the  realm  destroyed.  Upon  this 
complaint  it  was  resolved  in  parliament,  that  these  oppressions 
and  grievance!?  should  not  be  sulTered  in  any  manner;  and 
therefore  it  was  enacted,  that  the  king  and  his  subjects  should 
thenceforth  enjoy  the  rights  of  patronage  ;  that  free  elections  of  arch- 
bishops, bishops,  and  other  prelates  elective,  should  be  made  accord- 
ing to  the  ancient  grants  of  the  king's  progenitors  and  their  founders  ; 
that  no  bulls  or  provision  should  be  put  in  execution,  but  that  the 
provisors  should  be  attached,  fined,  and  ransomed  at  the  king's  will, 
and  withal  imprisoned,  till  they  had  renounced  the  benefits  of  their 
bulls,  satisfied  the  party  grieved,  and  given  sureties  not  to  commit 
the  like  oflence  again. 

Now,  Mr.  Lalor,  what  think  you  of  these  things'?  Did  you  be- 
lieve that  such  laws  as  these  had  been  made  against  the  Pope  200, 
250,  300  years  since  1  Was  King  Henry  VHl.  the  first  prince  that 
opposed  tile  Pope's  usurped  authority  1  Were  our  Protestants  the 
first  subjects  that  ever  complained  of  the  court  of  Rome  ]  Of  what 
religion,  think  you,  were  the  propounders  and  enacters  of  these 
laws]  Were  they  good  Catholics  or  good  subjects,  or  what  were 
they  ?  You  will  not  say  they  were  Protestants,  fur  you  will  not 
admit  the  reformed  religion  to  be  so  ancient  as  those  times;  neither 
can  you  say  they  were  tindutiful,  for  they  strove  to  uphold  their 
liege  lord's  sovereignty.  Doubtless  the  people  in  those  days  did 
generally  embrace  the  vulgar  errors  and  superstitions  of  the  Romish 
Church,  and  in  that  respect  were  papists  as  well  as  you.  But  they 
had  not  learned  the  new  doctrine  of  the  Pope's  supremacy,  and 
transcendano  authority  over  kings;  they  did  not  believe  he  had 
power  to  depose  princes,  and  to  discharge  subjects  of  their  allegiance, 
to  abrogate  the  fundamental  laws  of  kingdoms,  and  to  impose  his 
canons  as  binding  laws  upon  all  nations,  without  their  consents  ;  they 
thought  it  a  good  point  of  religion  to  be  good  subjects,  to  honor 

5 


66 

their  king,  to  love  their  country,  and  to  maintain  the  laws  and  liber- 
ties thereof,  howsoever  in  other  points  they  did  err  and  Wt-re  mis-led 
with  the  Church  of  Rome. — Hargrave's  State  Trials,  vol.  xi. 


E.—Fage  6. 

In  the  act  of  Parliament  in  the  fifth  year  of  Edward  VI.,  which 
established  these  alterations  bylaw,  it  is  declared  that  the  first  book, 
or  that  of  1549,  "  was  agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God  and  the  Primi- 
tive Church  ;"  but  "  because  there  hath  arisen  in  the  use  and  exer- 
cise of  the  said  common  service  divers  doubts  for  the  fashion  and 
manner  of  the  administration  thereof,  rather  by  the  curiosity  of  the 
minister  and  mistakes,  than  of  any  other  worthy  cause,  therefore,"  &c. 
In  other  words,  the  alterations  were  not  made  in  consequence  of  any 
change  in  the  opinion  of  the  Church,  nor  in  compliance  with  the  rule 
by  which  its  reformation  had  proceeded  ;  but  they  were  made  as  a 
concession,  in  things  not  absolutely  essential,  to  a  faction  which 
refined  only  to  consume,  and  which,  from  that  time  to  the  present, 
has  involved  the  Church  of  England  in  internal  strife  and  dissension. 

The  chief  of  these  alterations  in  the  liturgy  and  communion  service 
were : 

1.  In  respect  to  the  forms  of  the  oblation  and  invocation  in  the 
consecration  of  the  elements.  In  the  liturgy  of  1549  these  forms 
were  expressed,  but  were  omitted  in  the  revision  of  1552. 

2.  In  the  delivery  of  the  elements  to  communicants.  In  the  liturgy 
of  1549,  the  priest,  in  giving  the  body,  is  directed  to  say,  "The 
body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  preserve  thy  body  and  soul  unto 
everlasting  life ;"  and  to  use  a  like  form  in  delivering  the  cup.  In 
the  revision  of  1552,  the  minister,  in  delivering  the  bread,  was  directed 
to  say,  "  Take  and  eat  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ  died  for 
thee,  and  feed  on  him  in  thy  heart  by  faith  with  thanksgiving  ;"  and 
to  use  a  like  form  in  giving  the  cup.  In  1559  these  two  forms  were 
united,  as  they  now  stand  in  the  English  and  American  Prayer  Books. 

3.  In  respect  to  express  prayer  for  the  faithful  departed.  In  the 
general  prayer  of  intercession  the  minister  was  directed  to  say: — 
'*  Let  us  pray  for  the  whole  state  of  Christ's  Church  ;"  and  the  prayer 
contained  the  following  sublime  and  salutary  words  :  "  And  here  we 
do  give  unto  Thee  most  high  praise  and  hearty  thanks  for  the  won- 
derful grace  and  virtue,  declared  in  all  thy  saints,  from  the  beginning 


67 

of  the  world ;  and  chiefly  in  the  glorious  and  most  blessed  Virgin 
Mary,  mother  of  thy  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord  and  God,  and  in 
the  holy  patriarchs,  prophets,  apostles,  and  martyrs,  whose  examples, 
(0  Lord,)  and  steadfastness  in  Thy  fliith,  and  keeping  Thy  holy  com- 
mandments, grant  us  to  follow.  We  commend  unto  Thy  mercy, 
(O  Lord,)  all  other  Thy  servants,  which  are  departe  d  hence  from  us 
with  the  sign  of  Faith,  and  do  now  rest  in  the  sleep  of  peace;  grant 
unto  them,  we  beseech  Thee,  Thy  mercy  and  everlasting  peace,  and 
that  at  the  day  of  the  general  resurrection,  we  and  all  they  which  be 
of  the  mystical  body  of  thy  Son,  may  altogether  be  set  on  his  right 
hand,  and  hear  that  his  most  joyful  voice :  Come  unto  me,  O  ye  that 
be  blessed  of  my  Father,  and  possess  the  kingdom  which  is  prepared 
for  you  from  the  beginning  of  the  w^orld  :  Grant  this,  O  Father,  for 
Jesus  Christ's  sake,  our  only  Mediator  and  Advocate." 

In  the  revision  of  1552  the  prayer  was  introduced  with  the  words, 
"  Let  us  pray  for  the  whole  state  of  Christ's  Church  militant  here  on 
earth;'''  and  the  act  of  commemoration,  that  is  to  say,  the  whole  pas- 
sage aliove  quoted  from  the  liturgy  of  1549,  was  expunged.  In  1062, 
however,  the  following  act  of  commemoration,  the  same  now  used  in 
the  English  and  American  Prayer  Books,  was  adopted  :  "  And  we  also 
bless  thy  holy  Name  for  all  thy  servants  departed  this  life  in  Thy 
fliith  and  fear;  beseeching  Thee  to  give  us  grace  so  to  follow  their 
good  examples,  that  with  them  we  may  be  partakers  of  Thy  heavenly 
kingdom  :  Grant  this,"  &c. 

Our  American  Prayer  Book  contains  express  forms  of  the  Oblation 
and  Invocation,  taken  from  the  Liturgy  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal 
Church.  It  is  also  the  honor  of  the  Episcopal  Church  of  Scotland, 
and  should  be  an  inexpressible  comfort  to  her  members,  that  her  lit- 
urgy commemorates  the  departed  members  of  Christ's  Church  with 
an  express  prayer  that  they,  as  well  as  those  members  who  are  now 
militant  on  earth,  may  attain  to  a  joyful  resurrection  and  acquittal  in 
the  day  of  judgment.  The  prayer  is  introduced,  as  in  the  office  of 
Edward  VI.,  with  the  words,  "  Let  us  pray  for  the  whole  state  of 
Christ's  Church;"  and  the  part  to  which  I  refer  reads  as  follows: 
*'  And  we  also  bless  thy  holy  Name,  for  all  thy  servants,  who,  hav- 
ing finished  their  course  in  faith,  do  now  rest  from  their  labors.  And 
we  yield  unto  Thee  most  high  praise  and  hearty  thanks,  for  the  won- 
derful gi-ace  and  virtue,  declared  in  all  Thy  saints,  who  have  been  the 
choice  vessels  of  Thy  grace,  and  the  lights  of  the  world  in  their  seve- 
ral generations  :  most  humbly  beseeching  Thee  to  give  us  grace  to 
follow  the  example  of  their  steadfastness  in  Thy  faith,  and  obedience 


68 

to  thy  holy  commandments,  that  at  the  general  resurrection  we,  and 
all  they  who  are  of  the  mystical  body  of  Thy  Son,  may  be  set  on 
his  right  hand,  and  hear  that  his  most  joyful  voice.  Come,  ye  blessed  of 
my  Father,  inherit  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the  founda- 
tion  of  the  world :  Grant  this,"  &,c. 

In  this  connection  I  beg  to  lay  before  the  reader  the  following  let- 
ter of  the  illustrious  Bishop  Horsley,  in  which  he  expresses  very  de- 
cidedly his  opinion  of  the  comparative  merits  of  the  two  English 
Liturgies  of  1549  and  1552.  It  is  in  reply  to  a  letter  of  the  Rev. 
John  Skinner,  requesting  of  Bishop  Horsley  permission  to  publish  a 
collation  which  he  (Bishop  Horsley)  had  made  of  the  English  and 
Scotch  offices.  The  letter  is  given  by  Bishop  Skinner,  p.  157  of  his 
judicious  and  learned  treatise  on  "  The  Office  for  the  Sacrament  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,"  &c. 

"My  Dear  Sir  : 

"  Nothing  but  the  unusual  pressure  of  Parliamentary  business 
has  prevented  me  from  returning  an  earlier  answer  to  your  favour  of 
the  2Sth  of  last  month.  You  are  at  full  liberty  to  make  the  use 
proposed  of  my  "  Collation  of  Offices."  With  respect  to  the  com- 
parative merit  of  the  two  Offices  for  England  and  Scotland,  I  have  no 
scruple  in  declaring  to  you,  what  some  years  since,  I  declared  to 
Bishop  Abernethy  Drummond,  that  I  think  the  Scotch  Office  more 
conformable  to  the  primitive  models,  and  in  my  private  judgment 
more  edifying,  than  that  which  we  now  use ;  insomuch  that  were  I 
at  liberty  to  follow  my  own  private  judgment,  I  would  myself  use 
the  Scotch  Office  in  preference.  The  alterations  which  were  made  in 
the  communion-service,  as  it  stood  in  the  first  book  of  Edward  VI., 
to  humour  the  Calvinists,  were,  in  my  opinion,  much  for  the  worse ; 
nevertheless,  I  think  our  present  Office  is  very  good,  our  form  of  con- 
secration of  the  elements  is  sufficient ;  I  mean  that  the  elements  are 
consecrated  by  it,  and  made  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  in  the 
sense  in  which  our  Lord  himself  said  the  bread  and  wine  were  his 
body  and  blood.     I  remain, 

My  dear  Sir, 
Your  affectionate  and  faithful  Servant, 

S.  St.  Asaphens. 

London,  June  llth,  1806." 

"  Anglia  moesta  dole  tantum  tihi  lumen  ademptum: 
Patronum  ablatum  Scolia  moesta  dole." 

In  quoting  this  letter  of  Bishop  Horsley,  and  in  humbly  confessing 
not  only  that  my  judgment  wholly  approves,  but  that  ray  heart  also 


69 

warms  with  the  distinctive  excellencies  of  the  Liturgy  of  1549,  I  beg 
to  say,  that  I  neither  entertain  myself,  nor  have  I  a  particle  of  sym- 
pathy with  those  (if  any  such  there  be)  who  do  entertain,  the  least 
feeling  of  discontent  or  dissatisfaction  with  our  present  formularies. 
Indeed,  when  I  consider  how  perilous  the  work,  and  at  how  perilous  a 
crisis  effected,  of  removing  the  many  fables  and  superstitions  that  had 
grown  over  our  ritual,  my  feelings  of  gratitude  that  all  which  gave  just 
offence  has  been  expunged,  and  that  so  much  (beyond  what  is  neces- 
sary) of  comforting  doctrine  and  pious  usage  has  been  saved  and 
continued  to  us,  are  so  strong,  as  completely  to  overpower  and  ex- 
tinguish the  regret  which  I  might  otherwise  feel  at  the  loss  of  the 
comparatively  little  that  was  sacrificed  to  the  captiousness  and  spir- 
itual vandalism  of  a  party  which  was  more  bent  on  extirpating  popery 
than  on  preserving  the  Catholic  faith. 


G.—Fage  11. 

In  their  treatment  of  heretias,  the  primitive  bishops  were  content 
to  follow  the  directions  of  St.  Paul  to  Titus :  "  A  man  that  is  an 
heretic,  after  the  first  and  seco»d  admonition  reject,  knowing  that  he 
that  is  such  is  subverted  and  sinneth  ;"  (the  last  word  suggests,  that 
heresy,  from  the  first,  was  understood  to  involve  not  only  error  of 
doctrine,  but  viciousness  of  life  ;)  and  Christian  people  were  expected 
to  do  no  more  than  to  avoid  those  whom  their  bishops  rejected.  But 
after  the  establishment  of  Christianity  under  Constantine,  the  Em- 
perors, believing  the  morals  of  the  state  to  depend  on  the  purity  of 
the  Church,  conferre\i  privileges  on  those  who  remained  in  her  com- 
munion, from  which  others,  whom  the  Church  disowned  as  heretical, 
were  excluded.  Hence,  after  the  council  of  Nice,  A.  D.  325,  had 
declared  the  doctrine  of  the  Arians  to  be  heresy,  it  was  decreed,  by 
an  Imperial  edict,  that  they  who,  according  to  the  faith  and  discipline 
of  the  Apostles,  believed  in  the  Father,  the  Sox,  and  the  Holt  Ghost, 
confessing  the  unity  of  the  Divine  Nature  under  a  Trinity  of  per- 
sons, should  receive  the  designation,  and  be  admitted  to  the  privilege 
of  Catholic  Christians;  while  all  others  should  be  treated  as  heretics. 
For  some  time  after,  heresies  were  connected  with  seditions  and  tu- 
mults; and  hence  the  rigor  of  the  laws  against  them,  which,  however, 
seldom  proceeded  to  the  penalty  of  death.     At  least  Cardinal  Bellar- 


70 

mine,  who  has  ransacked  all  antiquity,  sacred  and  profane,  for  his  pre- 
cedents, alleges  no  more  of  Theodosius,  Valentinian,  Martianus,  and 
other  religious  Emperors,  than  that  they  "  sometbnes'''  resorted  to  the 
^'■ultimum  suppliciumf  taking  for  granted  that  the  "  ultimum  suppli- 
ciura"  in  these  cases  means  death,  and  forgetting  to  mention  that  the 
Emperors  had  an  eye  rather  to  disorder  and  sedition  in  the  State, 
than  to  erroneous  opinion  in  the  Church.  The  omission,  however, 
(for  I  would  not  be  too  hard  on  Bellarmine,  whose  smooth  and  trans- 
parent  latinity  makes  some  amends  for  the  harshness  of  his  creed,) 
is  pardonable  in  one  who  is  firmly  persuaded  that  an  obstinate 
heretic  ought  to  be  killed,  out  of  pure  favor  to  himself;  since  the 
longer  he  lives  the  more  errors  does  he  devise,  the  more  people  does 
he  pervert,  and  the  greater  the  damnation  he  heaps  upon  his  soul. 
"  Denique  (it  is  his  crowning  argument  in  favor  of  putting  heretics  to 
death.)  hereticis  obstinatis  beneficium  est,  quo  de  hac  vita  tollantur  ; 
nam  quo  diutius  vivant,  eo  plures  errores  excogitant,  plures  perver- 
tunt,  et  majorem  sibi  damnationem  acquirunt."  {Bellarm.  De  Laicis, 
cap.  21,  last  paragraph.) 

Before  the  division  of  the  Empire,  (about  the  beginning  of  the  9th 
century,)  the  bishops  appear  to  have  confined  themselves  to  the  office 
of  declaring  what  constituted  heresy,  leaving  it  to  the  temporal  magis- 
trate to  prosecute  the  heretic.  But  after  this  period,  as  the  canon 
law  superseded  the  imperial  code,  and  bishops  stretched  their  powers 
from  the  persuasion  of  the  souls  of  men,  to  the  coercion  of  their 
bodies,*  things  began  to  wear  another  face;  and  as  Fasce  oves  was 

*  The  Council  of  Trent  empowers  bishops  to  imprison  and  inflict  corporal  pun- 
ishments ;  and  the  spiritual  power  may  always,  according  to  Bellarmine,  use  the 
secular  as  its  instrument,  even  as  the  soul  uses  the  body,  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  its  purposes.  But  the  temper  of  the  Roman  Church  will  be  best 
understood  by  the  two  following  canons,  the  fiist  of  the  Third  Council  of  Lateran^ 
A.  D.  1179,  on  the  treatment  of  heretics,  and  the  other  of  the  Fourth  Council  of 
Lateran,  A.  D.  1215,  on  papal  authority  over  the  possessions  of  sovereign 
princes.  By  the  creed  of  Pius  IV.  (see  Appendix  R.)  all  Romanists  are  obliged 
to  confess  these  two  canons  as  part  of  the  Christian  Faith,  necessary  to  salva- 
tion.    I  have  used  Mr.  Perceval's  translation. 

Caywn  XXVII.  {On  the  Treatment  of  Heretics.) 

Although  ecclesiastical  discipline,  as  the  blessed  Leo  saith,  being  content 
with  the  judgment  of  the  priests,  does  not  take  sanguinary  revenge,  yet  is  it 
assisted  by  the  decrees  of  Catholic  princes,  that  men  may  often  seek  a  saving 
remedy  through  fear  of  corporal  punishment.  On  this  account,  because  in  Gas- 
cony,  Alb,  and  the  parts  of  Thoulouse,  and  other  places,  the  damnable  perverse- 
ness  of  the  heretics  whom  some  call  Cathari,  others  Patarenes,  others  Publicans, 
others  by  different  names,  has  gained  such  strength,  that  they  no  longer  practice 
their  wickedness  in  secret,  as  at  other  times,  but  make  open  manifestation 
of  their  error,  and  draw  over  the  weak  and  simple  folk  to  an  agreement  with 


71 

made  to  conclude  for  the  supremacy;  so  John  xv.,  6,  where  withered 
branches  are  said  to  be  cast  into  the  fire  and  to  be  burnt,  was  made 
an  unanswerable  argument  for  dooming  heretics  to  the  flames.  It 
was  not,  however,  until  the  early  part  of  the  13th  century,  that  an 
instance  of  this  dreadful  punishment  occurred  in  England.  The 
Publicans,  as  they  were  called,  who  were  burnt  in  many  parts  of 
France  in  the  12th  century,  (as  others  had  before  been  in  Italy,) 
though  numerous  in  England,  were  not  there  suffered  to  receive  this 

them  ;  we  decree  to  subject  them  and  their  defenders  and  receivers  to  anathema  ; 
and  under  pain  of  anathema  we  forbid  that  any  presume  to  maintain  or  support 
them  in  his  houses  or  land,  or  to  have  any  dealings  with  them.  But  it  they 
depart  in  this  sin,  let  not  the  oblation  be  made  for  them  (under  any  pretext  of 
privileges  granted  to  any  from  us,  on  any  other  ground,)  nor  let  them  receive 
burial  among  Christians.  In  like  manner  we  decree  concerning  the  Braban^ons, 
and  the  people  of  Aragon,  Navarre,  the  Basque  Provinces,  and  other  ruffians 
who  exercise  such  cruelty  against  the  Christians,  that  they  pay  no  respect  to 
churches  nor  monasteries,  nor  spare  widows  and  girls,  old  men  and  boys,  nor 
any  age  or  sex,  but  after  the  manner  of  heathens  waste  and  destroy  every  thing  ; 
that  they  who  have  conducted  them,  or  kept  and  supported  them  in  the  districts 
where  they  have  so  furiously  conducted  themselves,  be  publicly  denounced 
throughout  the  churches  on  Sundays  and  other  holy  days,  and  be  considered 
bound  by  the  same  sentence  and  penalty  as  the  forementioned  heretics,  nor  be 
admitted  to  the  communion  of  the  church,  until  they  have  abjured  that  pestilent 
company  and  heresy.  And  let  all  persons  whatsoever  who  arc  bound  to 
them  by  any  agreement,  know  that  they  are  released  from  all  debt  of  fidelity  or 
courtesy,  or  any  manner  of  service,  so  long  as  they  persist  in  such  iniquity. 
Morenver,  we  enjoin  them,  and  all  others  of  the  faithful,  that  for  he  remission 
of  their  sins,  they  manfully  oppose  such  disasters,  and  with  force  of  arms  defend 
the  Christian  people  against  them,  and  let  their  goods  be  confiscated,  and  let  it 
be  free  for  princes  to  subject  such  persons  to  slavery.  And  whosoever  shall 
there  depart  this  life  in  true  repentance,  let  them  not  doubt  that  they  will  obtain 
pardon  of  their  sins,  and  the  fruit  of  eternal  reward.  We  also,  out  of  the  divine 
mercy,  and  ralying  on  the  authority  of  the  blessed  apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  grant 
to  the  faithful  Christians  who  have  taken  arms  against  them,  and  at  the  advice 
of  the  bishops  or  other  prelates,  have  contended  to  drive  them  out,  a  relaxation 
for  two  years  from  enjoined  penance  :  or  if  they  have  made  a  longer  stay  there, 
we  leave  it  to  the  discretion  of  the  bishops,  to  whom  the  care  of  these  things  is 
enjoined,  that  at  their  will,  a  greater  indulgence  in  proportion  to  their  labor,  be 
granted  unto  them  :  but  we  order  that  those  who  shall  contemptuously  have 
refused  to  obey  the  warning  of  the  bishops  in  this  respect,  be  estranged  from  the 
participation  in  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  &c. 

Canon  HI. — {Papal  Authority  over  the  Possessions  of  Sovereign  Princes.) 

We  excommunicate  and  anathematize  every  hereS^  which  exalteth  itself 
against  this  holy  orthodox  and  Catholic  faith,  which  we  have  set  forth  above  : 
condemning  all  heretics,  by  whatsoever  names  they  may  be  reckoned,  who  have 
indeed  diverse  faces,  but  their  tails  are  bound  together,  for  they  make  agreement 
in  the  same  filly. 

Let  such  persons,  when  condemned,  be  left  to  the  secular  powers  who  may 
be  present,  or  to  their  olficers,  to  be  punished  in  a  fitting  manoer,  those  who  are 
of  the  clergv  being  first  degraded  from  their  orders  :  so  that  the  goods  of  such 
condemned  persons,  being  laymen,  shall  be  confiscated  ;  but  in  the  case  of  clerks, 
be  applied  to  the  churches  from  which  they  received  their  stipends. 

But  let  those  who  are  only  marked  with  suspicion,  be  smitten  with  the  sword 
ofaimthemas,  and  shunned  by  all  men,  until  they  make  proper  satisfaction,  un- 


"7% 

punishment.  ("Publicani,"  says  Roger  Iloveden,  A.  D,  1182,  a® 
quoted  by  Twisden,  "  comburebantur  in  pluribus  locis  per  regnum 
Franclae,  quod  Rex  AngliiB  nullo  modo  permisit  in  terra  sua,  licet 
ibi  essent  perplurimi.")  In  the  13th  century,  however,  there  was 
one,  and  I  believe  but  one  instance,  and  in  the  14th  century  but  two 
instances,  of  this  execrable  punishment  for  heresy  in  England.  About 
the  commencement  of  the  15th  century  (A.  D.  1400)  occurs  the  case 
of  William  Sautre.       Before  this  time  there  was  no  statute  on  the 

less,  according  to  the  grounds  of  suspicion  and  the  quality  of  the  person,  they 
shall  have  demonstrated  their  innocence  by  a  proportionate  purgation.  So  that 
if  any  shall  persevere  in  excommunication  for  a  twelvemonth,  thenceforth  they 
shall  be  condemned  as  heretics.  And  let  the  secular  powers,  whatever  offices 
they  may  hold,  be  induced  and  admonished,  and,  if  need  be,  compelled  by  eccle- 
siastical censure,  that,  as  they  desire  to  be  accounted  faithful,  they  should,  for 
the  defence  of  the  faith,  publicly  set  forth  an  oath,  that  to  the  utmost  of  their 
power  they  will  strive  to  exterminate  from  the  lands  under  their  jurisdiction  all 
heretics  who  shall  be  denounced  by  the  church  ;  so  that  whensoever  any  person 
is  advanced,  either  to  spiritual  or  temporal  power,  he  be  bound  to  confirm  this  de- 
cree with  an  oath. 

But  if  any  temporal  lord,  being  required  and  admonished  by  the  church,  shall 
neglect  to  cleanse  his  country  of  this  heretical  filth,  let  him  be  bound  with  the 
chain  of  excommunication,  by  the  metropolitan,  and  the  other  co-provincial 
bishops.  And  if  he  shall  scorn  to  make  satisfaction  within  a  year,  let  this  be 
signified  to  the  supreme  Pontiff:  that,  thenceforth,  he  may  declare  his  vassals 
to  be  absolved  from  their  fidelity  to  him,  and  may  expose  his  land  to  be  occupied 
by  the  Catholics,  who,  having  exterminated  the  heretics,  may,  without  contra- 
diction, possess  it,  and  preserve  it  in  purity  of  faith  :  saving  the  right  of  the  chief 
lord,  so  long  as  he  himself  presents  no  difficulty  and  offers  no  hindrance  in  this 
matter  :  the  same  law,  nevertheless,  being  observed  concerning  those  who  have 
not  lords  in  chief. 

But  let  the  Catholics,  who,  having  taken  the  sign  of  the  cross,  have  girded 
themselves  for  the  extermination  of  the  heretics,  enjoy  the  same  indulgence,  and 
be  armed  with  the  same  privilege  as  is  conceded  to  those  who  go  to  the  assist- 
ance of  the  Holy  Land. 

But  we  who  believe  decree  also  to  subject  to  excommunication,  the  receivers, 
the  defenders,  the  abettors  of  the  heretics  ;  firmly  determining  that  if  any  one, 
after  he  has  been  marked  with  excommunication,  shall  refuse  to  make  satisfac- 
tion within  a  twelvemonth,  he  be  thenceforth  of  right  in  very  deed  infamous, 
and  be  not  admitted  to  public  offices  or  councils,  nor  to  elect  for  any  thing  of  the 
sort,  nor  to  give  evidence.  Let  him  also  be  intestible,  so  as  neither  to  have 
power  to  bequeath  nor  to  succeed  to  any  inheritance. 

Moreover,  let  no  man  lie  obliged  to  answer  him  in  any  matter,  but  let  him  be 
compelled  to  answer  others.  If  haply,  he  be  a  judge,  let  his  sentence'have  no  force, 
nor  let  any  causes  be  brought  for  his  hearing.  If  he  be  an  advocate,  let  not  his 
pleading  be  admitted.  *If  a  notary,  let  the  instruments  drawn  up  by  him  be  in- 
valid, and  be  condemned  with  their  damned  author.  And  we  charge  that  the 
same  be  observed  in  similar  cases.  But  if  he  be  a  clerk,  let  him  be  deposed  from 
every  office  and  benefice,  that  where  there  is  the  greatest  fault,  the  greatest  ven- 
geance may  be  exercised. 

But  if  any  shall  fail  to  shun  such  persons,  after  they  have  been  pointed  out 
by  the  church,  let  them  be  compelled,  by  the  sentence  of  excommunication,  to 
make  fitting  satisfaction.  Let  the  clergy  by  no  means  administer  the  sacra- 
ments of  the  church  to  such  pestilent  persons,  nor  presume  to  commit  them  to 
Christian  burial,  nor  receive  their  alms  nor  oblations  :  otherwise  let  them  be  de- 
prived of  their  office,  to  which  they  must  not  be  restored  without  the  special  in- 
dulgence of  the  Apostolic  See. 


73 

subject,  and  the  four  persons  above  mentioned  were  punished  under 
the  common  law,  having  been  first  convicted  and  condemned  by- 
ecclesiastical  process  ;  Sautre  in  a  provincial  council  under  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury. 

The  first  parliamentary  statute  in  relation  to  heresy  (5  Richard 
II,  cap.  5)  was  enacted  A.  D.  1381,  and  entitled  "  An  act  against 
preachers  of  heresie."  The  preamble  sets  forth  that,  "  forasmuch  as 
it  is  openly  known  that  there  be  persons  within  the  realm,  going 
from  county  to  county,  and  from  town  to  town,  in  certain  habits, 
under  dissimulation  of  great  holiness,  and  without  license,  etc.,  preach- 
ing daily,  not  only  in  churches  and  church-yards,  but  also  in  markets, 
fxirs,  and  other  open  places  where  a  great  congregation  is,  divers  ser- 
mons, containing  heresies  and  notorious  errors,  to  the  great  emblem- 
ishing  of  the  Christian  fliith,  etc. ;  which  persons  do  also  preach 
diverse  matters  of  sclaunder,  to  engender  discord  and  dissension  be- 
twixt diverse  estates  of  the  said  realm,  as  well  spiritual  as  temporal, 
in  exciting  of  the  people  to  the  great  peril  of  all  the  realm ;  which 
preachers,  cited  or  summoned  before  the  ordinaries  of  the  places, 
there  to  answer,  etc,  will  not  ob^y  to  their  summons  and  command- 
ments, nor  care  not  for  their  monitions  nor  censures  of  the  Holy 
Church,  but  expressly  despise  them,  and  moreover,  by  their  subtil 
and  ingenious  words,  do  draw  the  people  to  hear  their  sermons,  and 
do  maintain  them  in  their  errors  by  strong  hands  and  by  great  routs ;" 
and  the  ordinance  is,  "  that  the  king's  commissions  be  made  and  di- 
rected to  the  sheriffs  and  other  ministers  of  our  sovereign  lord  the 
king,  or  other,  etc.,  to  arrest  all  such  preachers,  and  also  their  fautors, 
maintainers  and  abettors,  and  to  hold  them  in  arrest  and  strong  pris- 
ons till  they  will  justify  them  according  to  the  law  and  reason  of  the 
Holy  Church."  The  statute  imposes  no  other  penalty,  and  is  evi- 
dently intended  merely  to  preserve  the  public  peace,  and  not  to  pun- 
ish men  for  their  opinions.  It  does  not  encroach,  I  apprehend,  on 
liberty  of  conscience. 

The  next  statute  (2  Henry  IV.,  cap.  15)  is  entitled  "An  act  touch- 
ing heresies,"  and  was  enacted  A.  D.  1400,  the  same  year  in  which 
Sautre  was  burnt.  This  act  is  remarkable  in  itself,  and  so  important 
in  estimating  the  true  nature  of  the  reformation,  and  the  bearings 
respectively  of  the  Papal  and  Regal  supremacy,  that  I  transcribe  the 
ordinance  entire,  omitting  the  long  and  tedious  preamble.  It  is  en- 
titled "  An  act  touching  Heresies,"  and  enacts  : 

That  none  within  the  said  realm,  or  any  other  dominions  subject  to 
his  Royal  Majesty,  presume  to  preach  openly  or  privily,  without  license 


74 

of  the  diocesan  of  the  same  place  first  required  and  obtained ;  Curates 
in  their  own  churches,  and  persons  hitherto  privileged,  and  other  of  the 
canon  law  granted,  only  except.     For  that  none,  from  henceft)rth,  any- 
thing preach,  hold,  teach,  or  instruct,  openly  or  privily,  or  make  or 
■write  any  book  contrary  to  the  Catholic  faith,  or  determination  of  the 
Holy  Church,  nor  of  such  sect  and  wicked  doctrines  and  opinions  shall 
make  any  conventicles,  or  in  any  wise  hold  or  exercise  schools ;  and,  also- 
that  none  from  henceforth,  in  any  wise,  favor  such  preacher,  or  maker 
of  any  such  and  like  conventicles,  or  holding  or  exercising  schools,  of 
making  or  writing  such  books,  or  so  teaching,  informing,  or  exciting  the 
people  j  nor  any  of  them  maintain,  or  any  wise  sustain.     And  that  all 
and  singular  having  such  books,  or  any  writings  of  such  wicked  doctrine 
and  opinions,  shall  really  with  effect  deliver  or  cause  to  be  delivered, 
all  such  books  and  writings  to  the  diocesan  of  the  same  place  within  for- 
ty  days  from  the  time  of  the  proclamation  of  this  ordinance  and 
statute.     And  if  any  person  or  persons,  of  whatsoever  kind,  estate, 
or  condition  that  he  or  they  be,  from  henceforth  do  or  attempt  against 
the  royal  ordinance  and  statute  aforesaid,  in  the  premises  or  in  any  of 
them,  or  such  books  in  the  form  aforesaid  do  not  deliver,  then  the 
diocesan  of  the  same  place  in  his  diocese,  such  person  or  persons  in 
this  behalf  defamed  or  evidently  suspected,  and  every  of  them,  may, 
by  the  authority  of  the  said  ordinance  and  statute,  cause  to  be  arrest- 
ed, and  under  safe  custody  in  his  prisons  to  be  detained,  till  he  or 
they  of  the  articles  laid  to  him  or  them  in  this  behalf,  do  canonically 
purge  him  or  themselves,  or  else  such  wicked  sect,  pieachings,  doc- 
trines, and  heretical  and  erroneous  opinions,  do  abjure  according  as 
the  laws  of  the  church  do  require,  so  that  the  said  diocesan  by  him- 
self or  his  commissaries   do  openly  and  judicially  proceed  against 
such  persons  so  arrested,  and  remaining  under  his  said  custody,  to  all 
the  effect  of  the  law,  and  determine  that  same  business  according  to 
the  canonical  decrees  within  three  months  after  the  said  arrest,  any 
lawful  impediment  ceasing.     And  if  any  person,  in  any  case  above 
expressed,  be  before  the  diocesan  of  the  place  or  his  commissaries 
canonically  convict;  then  the  same  diocesan  may  do  to  be  kept  in 
his  prison,"  the  said  person  so  convict  for  the  manner  of  his  default,  and 
after  the  quality  of  the  offence  according  and  as  long  as  to  his  discre- 
tion shall  seem  expedient,  and  moreover,  to  put  the  same  person  to 
the  secular  court,  (except  in  cases  where  he  according  to  the  canoni- 
cal decree  ought  to  be  left.)  to  pay  to  our  sovereign   lord  the  king 
his  pecuniar  fine,  according  as  the  same  fine  shall  seem  competent 
to  the  diocesan,  for  the  manner  and  quality  of  the  ofTnice,  in  which 
case  the  same  diocesan,  shall  be  bound  to  certify  the  king  of  the  same 
fine  in  his  exchequer  by  his  letters  patents,  sealed  with  his  seal,   to 
the  effect  that  such  fine  by  the  king's  authority,  may  be  required  and 
levied  to  his  use  of  the  goods  of  the  same  person  so  convict.     And  if 
any   person   within  the  said  realm    and   dominions,  upon    the    said 
wicked   preachings,  doctrines,  opinions,   schools,  and  heretical  and 
erronius   informations,  or  any  of  them  be  before  the  diocesan   of  the 
same  place  or  his  commissaries  sententially  convict,  and  the  same 
wicked  sect,  preachings,  doctrines  and  opinions,  schools  and  infor- 


75 

mations,  do  refuse  duly  to  abjure,  or  by  the  diocesan  of  the  same 
place  or  his  commissaries  after  the  abjuration  made  by  the  same  per- 
son pronounced,  lall  into  relaps,  so  that  according  to  the  holy  canons 
he  ought  to  be  left  to  the  secular  court,  whereupon  credence  shall  be 
given  to  the  diocesan  of  the  same  place,  or  to  his  commissaries  in 
this  behalf,  then  the  shiriffof  the  county  of  the  same  place,  and  may- 
or, and  shiriffs  or  shiriff,  or  mayor  and  bailiffs  of  the  city,  town  and 
borouo-h  of  the  same  county,  next  to  the  same  diocesan  or  the  same  com- 
missaries, shall  be  personally  present  in  preferring  of  such  sentences, 
when  they  by  the  same  diocesan  or  his  commissaries  shall  be  required; 
and  they  the  same  persons  and  every  of  them,  after  such  sentence  pro- 
mulgate, shall  receive  ;  and  them  before  the  people  in  an  high  place  do 
to  be  burnt,  that  such  punishment  may  strike  in  fear  to  the  minds  of 
other,  whereby  no  such  wicked  doctrine,  and  heretical  and  erronius 
opinions,  nor  their  authors  and  fautors  in  the  said  realm  and  dominions 
against  the  Catholick  taith,  Christian  law  and  determination  of  the  holy 
Church,  (which  God  prohibit,)  be  sustained  or  in  any  wise  suffered,  in 
which  all  and  singular  the  premises  concerning  the  said  ordinance  and 
statute,  the  shiriffs,  mayors  and, bailiffs,  of  the  said  counties,  cities, 
boroughs  and  towns,  shall  be  attending,  aiding  and  supporting,  to  the 
said  diocesans  and  their  commissaries." 

This  statute,  it  will  be  seen,  ordains  that  no  person  in  the  king's 
dominions,  or  subject  to  his  royal  majesty,  shall  hold,  teach  or  in- 
struct openly  or  privately,  or  make  or  write  any  book  contrary  to 
the  Catholic  faith  or  determination  of  holy  Church ;  that  none  shall 
favor,  maintain,  or  m  any  wise  sustain,  those  who  make  or  write 
such  books  ;  that  all  and  singular  who  have  such  books  or  writings 
shall  deliver  them  to  the  bishop;  and  that  the  bishop  may  arrest 
and  detain  in  safe  custody  in  his  (the  bishop's)  prison  all  who  are 
accused  of  transgressing  in  any  of  these  particulars,  until  they  can 
purge  themselves  from  suspicion.  But  this  is  not  the  worst;  for 
all  persons  who  had  the  misfortune  to  be  suspected  of  heresy,  are 
directed  by  the  statute  to  be  detained  in  custody,  until  they  abjure 
their  erroneous  opinions,  so  that  (here  lies  the  craftiness  of  this 
tyrannical  act)  "  the  diocesan  by  himself,  or  his  commissaries,  do 
openly  and  judicially  proceed  against  such  persons  so  arrested  and 
remaining  under  his  said  custody,  to  all  the  effect  of  the  law,  and 
determine  that  same  business  according  to  the  canonical  decrees  with- 
in three  months  after  the  said  arrest." 

The  statute  enacts  that  the  man  who  is  convicted  of  heresy  shall 
be  burnt  to  death;  but  what  does  it  tell  us  that  heresy  is  %  On  this 
point  it  is  utterly  vague  and  undefined.  And  whom  does  it  declare 
to  be  the  judges  of  heresy,  and  by  what  rule  does  it  authorize  them 
to  proceed  in  the  determination  of  heresy  1     The  bishops  were  to  be 


76 

the  judges  of  heresy.  Very  well.  And  the  rule  of  judgment,  what 
was  that  ?  The  Scriptures "?  The  known  definitions  of  the  Catholic 
Church?  Nothing  of  the  sort,  but  their  own  canonical  decrees; 
that  is,  any  thing  and  every  thing  which  might  be  made  to  appear 
repugnant,  not  to  the  well  known  compendious  and  immutable  faith 
of  the  Catholic  Church,  but  to  the  expansive  and  expanding  canons 
and  decrees  enacted  and  administered  by  bishops  subject  to  the  See 
of  Rome,  Any  man,  indeed,  who  failed  in  aught  in  obedience  to  his 
bishop,  as  (to  take  Lord  Coke's  instance)  in  the  payment  of  a  legacy, 
might,  under  this  statute,  be  brought  under  suspicion  of  heresy,  de- 
tained in  the  bishop's  prison  until  he  had  yielded  to  his  extortion,  and 
possibly  condemned  to  the  stake  as  a  heretic,  when  in  fact  he  had 
done  no  more  than  (and  perhaps  not  so  much  as)  transgress  a  canon, 
of  the  bare  existence  of  which  he  had  never  heard.  We  shall  see 
presently  that  these  evils  were  not  imaginary. 

The  above  act  of  Henry  IV.  is  moreover  remarkable  as  being  the 
first  on  the  English  statute  book  that  made  heresy  a  capital  offence, 
and  ordained  the  heretic  to  be  burnt.  The  next  statute  in  relation 
to  heresy  is  entitled  "  An  Act  for  the  Reformation  of  Heresy  and 
Lollardy."  The  preamble  declares,  that  "  Forasmuch  as  great 
rumors,  congregations  and  insurrections,  here  in  the  realm  of  Eng- 
land, by  divers  of  the  king's  liege  people,  as  well  by  them  which 
were  of  the  sect  of  heresy,  commonly  called  Lollards,  as  for  other 
of  their  confederacy,  excitation  and  abetment,  now  of  late  were 
made,  to  the  intent  to  annul,  destroy  and  subvert  the  Christian  faith 
and  the  law  of  God  and  holy  Church  within  the  same  realm  of 
England,  and  also  to  destroy  the  same,  our  sovereign  lord  the  king, 
and  all  other  manner  of  estates  of  the  same  realm  of  England,  as  well 
spiritual  as  temporal,  and  also  all  manner  of  policy,  and  finally  the 
laws  of  the  land ;"  and  appears  to  be  aimed  against  heretics  not 
as  such,  but  as  disturbers  of  the  peace  and  subverters  of  the  laws  of 
the  kingdom.  It  enacts  that  all  officers,  on  their  admission  to  office, 
shall  take  an  oath  to  destroy  Lollardy  and  assist  the  Ordinary  there- 
in, and  empowers  justices  of  the  peace  to  inquire  of  offences  against 
the  act,  and  have  the  offender,  unless  indicted  for  an  oflence  which 
belongs  to  the  cognizance  of  the  secular  judge,  delivered  to  the  Ordi- 
nary. It  humanely  provides  that  Suspected  persons,  while  in 
custody  of  the  sheriff,  may  be  admitted  to  mainprise,  and  moreover 
gives  them  the  benefit  of  a  trial  by  jury,  before  they  are  surrendered  to 
the  spiritual  power  to  be  tried  for  heresy.  It  leaves  the  former  acta 
unrepealed. 


77 

The  above  are  all  the  statutes  touching  heresy,  which  were  enacted 
before  the  reformation,  and  they  continued  in  force  until  A.  D.,  1533. 
The  most  important  of  them  is  the  statute  of  Henry  IV.,  and  taken 
together,  they  will  give  the  reader  some  insight  into  the  nature  of 
the  Bishop  of  Eome's  jurisdiction  in  England;  showing  it  to  be  an 
outward  and  coercive  power,  originally  granted  by  the  crown,  to  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  for  the  advancement  of  morals  and  religion,  and 
abused  by  the  grantee,  by  means  of  canons  and  decrees,  administered 
by  bishops  responsible  to  himself,  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  the 
conscience,  estate  and  liberties  of  the  subject  under  his  own  control. 
What  the  crown  gave  under  Henry  IV.,  it  took  away  (as  it  had  a  per- 
fect right  to  do)  under  Henry  VIII. ;  and,  if  I  mistake  not,  it  was  the 
divorce  of  the  latter  from  the  Pope  and  canon  law  of  Rome,  which 
made  him  a  monster  of  iniquity  in  the  eyes  of  the  papacy,  far  more 
than  his  divorce  from  Catherine  of  Aragon. 

The  statute  of  Henry  IV.  was  repealed  by  25  Henry  VIII.,  cap. 
14,  and  I  crave  from  the  reader  a  careful  perusal  of  the  preamble  of 
the  latter  statute  assigning  the  reasons  for  the  repeal  of  the  former. 
A  comparison  of  the  two  will  put  him  in  no  worse  position  than  be- 
fore for  judging  for  himself,  whether  the  rights  and  liberty  of  con- 
science for  which  the  English  people  and  their  American  descendants 
are  proudly  distinguished,  have  been  owing  to  the  papal  jurisdiction 
in  England,  or  to  its  overthrow  and  continued  exclusion.. 

25  Henry  VIII.,  Cap.  14. 
An  Act  for  the  Punishment  of  Heresie. 
In  most  humble  wise  lamentably  shewelhunto  your  highness,  your 
most  humble,  loving  and  obedient  subjects,  the  commons  of  this  your 
realm,  that  where  the  clergy  of  the  same,  in  the  second  year  of  king 
Henry  the  IV.,  one  of  your  most  noble  progenitors,  upon  their  sug- 
gestion did  interpret  and  obtain  by  authority  of  the  Parliament, 
holden  in  the  said  second  year,  that  it  should  be  lawful  for  every 
Ordinary  to  convent,  arrest  and  imprison  any  person  or  persons, 
whom  they  thought  defamed  or  suspect  of  heresy,  and  them  to  keep 
in  their  prisons  till  they  were  purged  thereof,  or  abjured,  or  commit- 
ted to  lay  power  to  be  burned,  after  the  determination  of  the  holy 
Church,  and  canonical  sanctions,  as  in  an  act  made  at  the  Parliament, 
holden  in  the  said  second  year  of  king  Henry  the  IV.,  amongst 
other  things  more  at  large  doth  appear.  Forasmuch  as  the  said  act 
doth  not  in  any  part  thereof  declare  any  certain  cases  of  heresy,  con- 
trary to  the  determination  of  the  holy  Scripture,  or  the  canonical 
sanctions  therein  expressed,  whereby  your  most  loving  and  obedient 
subjects  might  be  learned  to  eschew  the  dangers  and  pains  in  the  said 
act  comprised,  and  to  abhor  and  detest  that  foul  and  detestable  crime 
of  heresy  ;  and,  also,  because  those  words  canonical  sanctions,  and 


78 

such  other  like,  contained  in  the  said  act,  are  so  general,  that  unneth* 
the  most  expert  and  best  learned  man  of  this  your  realm,  diligently 
lying  in  wait  upon  himself,  can  eschew  and  avoid  the  penalty  and 
dangers  of  the  same  act  and  canonical  sanctions,  if  he  should  be  ex- 
amined upon  such  captious  interrogatories,  as  is,  and  hath  been  ac- 
customed to  be,  ministered  by  the  Ordinaries  of  this  realm,  in  cases 
where  they  will  suspect  any  person  or  persons  of  heresy.  And  over 
this,  forasmuch  as  it  standeth  not  with  the  right  order  of  justice  nor 
good  equity,  that  any  person  should  be  convict,  and  put  to  the  loss 
of  his  life,  good  name,  or  goods,  unless  it  were  by  due  accusation  and 
witness,  or  by  presentment,  verdict,  confession  or  process  of  outlawry; 
and,  also,  by  the  laws  of  your  realm,  for  treason  committed  to  the 
peril  of  your  most  royal  majesty,  upon  whose  surity  dependeth  the 
whole  wealth  of  this  realm,  no  person  can,  nor  may  be  put  to  death 
but  by  presentment,  verdict,  confession,  or  process  of  outlawry,  as 
is  aforesaid.  Wherefore  it  is  not  reasonable,  that  any  Ordinary,  by 
any  suspection  conceived  of  his  own  fantasie,  without  due  accusation 
or  presentment,  should  put  any  subject  of  this  realm  in  the  infamy 
and  slander  of  heresy,  to  the  peril  of  life,  loss  of  name  and  goods. 
And,  (hat  also,  there  be  many  heresies  and  pains,  and  punishment  for 
heresies  declared  and  ordained,  in  and  by  the  canonical  sanctions,  and 
by  the  laws  and  ordinances  made  by  the  Popes  or  Bishops  of  Rome, 
and  by  their  authorities,  for  holding,  doing,  preaching  or  speaking  of 
things  contrary  to  the  said  canonical  sanctions,  laws  and  ordinances, 
which  be  but  humane,  being  meer  repugnant  and  contrarious  to  the 
prerogative  of  your  imperial  crown,  regal  jurisdiction,  laws,  statutes, 
and  ordinances  of  this  your  realm  ;  by  reason  whereof  your  people  of 
the  same,  observing,  maintaining,  defending,  and  d\ie  executing  of 
your  said  laws,  statutes  and  prerogative  royal,  by  authority  of  that 
act,  made  in  the  said  second  year  of  king  Henry  the  IV.,  may  be 
brought  into  slander  of  heresy,  to  their  great  infamy  and  danger,  and 
peril  of  their  lives.  In  consideration  whereof  it  may  please  your 
highness,  by  the  assent  of  your  lords  spiritual  and  temporal  and  com- 
mons in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  authority  of  the 
same,  to  annul,  abrogate,  frustrate,  and  make  void  the  said  act,  made 
in  the  second  year  of  king  Henry  the  IV.,  and  everything  therein  con- 
tained.    [Gibsoii's  Codex,  p.  410.) 

The  remainder  of  this  statute,  however,  goes  on  to  provide  for  the 
punishment  of  heresy  and  lollardy  under  certain  specific  restrictions, 
and  unhappily  concludes  by  ordaining  that  the  condemned  person  re- 
fusing to  aV)jure  his  errors,  "  shall  be  committed  to  the  lay  power  to  be 
burnt  in  open  places,  for  example  of  others,  as  hath  been  accustomed." 

The  next  statute  is  that  of  1  Edward  VI,,  cap.  12,  and  it  deserves 
to  be  emphatically  noticed  that  by  this  statute  all  previous  acts  of 
Parliament  touching  religious  opinions  are,  without  reservation,  re. 
pealed  and  annulled.     The  third  section  of  the  act  is  as  follows  : 

*  An  obsolete  word,  signifying  scarcely  or  hardly. 


79 

iii. — And  also  be  it  enacted  by  the  authority  aforesaid,  that  all 
acts  of  Parliament  and  statutes,  touching,  mentioning,  or  in  anywise 
concerning  religion  or  opinions,  that  is  to  say,  as  well  the  statute 
made  in  the  fifth  year  of  the  reign  of  the  king's  noble  progenitor,  king 
Richard  the  II.,  and  the  statute  made  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign 
of  king  Henry  the  V.,  and  the  statute  also  made  in  the  twenty-fifth 
year  of  the  reign  of  king  Henry  the  VIII.,  concerning  punishment  and 
reformation  of  hereticks  and  lollards,  and  every  provision  therein 
contained,  ,  .  .  shall  from  henceforth  be  repealed,  and  utterly 
void  and  of  none  effect."     (^Ihid.  p.  404. ) 

On  the  death  of  Edward  VI.,  and  the  accession  of  Mary,  the  papal 
party  again  came  into  power,  and  instantly  the  sanguinary  statutes 
reappear. 

1  Mar.  Cap.  6. 

An  Act  for  the  Reviving  of  the  three  Statutes  made  for  tlie  Punishment 

of  Heresies. 

For  the  eschuingand  avoiding  of  errors  and  heresies,  which  of  late 
have  risen  and  grown,  and  much  increased  within  this  realm,  for  that 
the  Ordinaries  have  wanted  authority  to  proceed  against  those  that 
Avere  infected  therewith.  Be  it  therefore  ordained  and  enacted  by 
the  authority  of  this  present  Parliament,  that  the  statute  made  in  the 
fifth  year  of  the  reign  of  king  Richard  the  II.,  concerning  the  arrest- 
ing and  apprehension  of  erroneous  and  heretical  preachers,  and  one 
other  statute  made  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  king  Henry  the 
IV.,  concerning  repressing  of  heresies  and  punishment  of  hereticks, 
and,  also,  one  other  statute  made  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of 
king  Henry  the  V.,  concerning  the  suppression  of  heresy  and  lollardy , 
and  every  article,  branch  and  sentence  contained  in  the  same  three 
several  acts,  and  every  of  them,  shall  from  the  twentieth  day  of  Jan- 
uary next  coming,  be  revived  and  be  in  full  force,  strength  and  effect, 
to  all  intents,  constructions  and  purposes  for  ever.     {^Ibkl.  p.  405.) 

Thus  the  atrocious  statute  of  Henry  IV.,  which,  for  the  gravest  rea- 
sons, and  after  manifold  experience  of  its  evils,  had  been  repealed  in 
the  reigns  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward  VI.,  was  revived  under 
Mary,  and  bequeathed  as  a  precious  legacy  to  the  English  Church  and 
nation  "  for  ever  !"  The  revival  of  it  conferred  once  more  an  inquisi- 
torial power  on  the  "Ordinaries,''  i.  e.  the  bishops,  "who  (which  was 
a  sad  spectacle  to  behold)  polluted  England  in  all  parts  thereof 
by  burning  Protestants  alive.  For,"  continues  the  truthful  Camden, 
who  was  living  at  the  time,  "  they  destroyed  more  of  all  ranks  and 
qualities ;  bishops,  ministers  of  God's  Word,  and  of  the  common 
people,  by  this  horrible  kind  of  death,  within  the  space  of  five  years, 


80 

than  (as  some  have  observed)  king  Henry  the  VIII.  did  in  full  seven 
and  thirty  years;  or  than  England  ever  saw  so  served  since  the  time 
that  in  the  reign  of  king  John,  Christians  first  began  among  us  to 
tyrannize  one  over  another  with  fire  and  faggot." 

On  the  accession  of  Elizabeth,  the  coercive  jurisdiction  in  England, 
which  the  Bishop  of  Eome  had  originally  received  as  a  trust  from  the 
crown,  and  had  afterwards  claimed  as  his  own  and  sought  to  use,  to 
the  ruin  of  every  sovereign  that  did  not  bow  to  him  the  neck,  was 
forever  restored  to  the  crown.  This  was  done  by  the  act  entituled 
"  An  act  to  restore  to  the  crown  the  ancient  jurisdiction  over  the  state 
Ecclesiastical,"  passed  in  the  first  year  of  Elizabeth,  the  fifteenth  sec- 
tion of  which  reads  as  follows  : 

§  XV.  And,  that  also,  it  may  please  your  highness,  that  it  may  be 
further  established  and  enacted  by  the  authority  aforesaid  ;  That  one 
act  and  statute  made  in  the  first  and  second  years  of  the  late  king 
Philip  and  queen  Mary,  entituled,  an  act  for  the  reviving  of  three 
statutes,  made  for  the  punishment  of  heresies ;  and,  also,  the  said 
three  statutes  mentioned  in  the  said  act,  and  by  the  same  acts  revived, 
and  all  and  every  branches,  articles,  clauses  and  sentences  contained 
in  the  said  several  acts  and  statutes,  and  every  of  them,  shall  be  from 
the  last  day  of  this  session  of  Parliament,  deemed  and  remain  utter- 
ly repealed,  void,  and  of  none  eftect,  to  all  intents  and  purposes  ;  any- 
thing in  the  said  several  acts,  or  any  of  them  contained,  or  any  other 
matter  or  cause  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.  [Gibson^s  Codex, 
p.  405.) 

Thus  it  appears  that  when  the  papal  party  came  into  power  under 
Mary,  the  statutes  punishing  religious  opinions  with  temporal  penal- 
ties having  been  previously  repealed  under  Edward  VI.,  were  revived 
and  enforced,  and  when  that  party  went  out  of  power  these  statutes 
were  again  repealed.  These  are  facts,  from  which  every  reader  may 
draw  his  own  conclusions.  How  long  it  would  have  been,  had  the 
same  party  remained  in  power,  before  erroneous  opinions  would  have 
ceased  to  be  punishable  by  confiscation  of  goods,  and  by  fire  and  fag- 
got, and  whether,  if  papists  should  regain  the  power,  they  would  again 
make  the  same  use  of  it,  are  merely  speculative  questions  on  which 
I  have  no  disposition  to  dwell.  Peihaps  the  present  state  of  things 
In  Naples  and  Tuscany  may  throw  light  on  the  subject. 

The  reader  may  ask  whether  in  this  act  of  Elizabeth,  repealing  all 
former  statutes,  there  were  no  reservation,  continuing  heresy  as  a 
punishable  offence  ?  Certainly  there  was,  but  it  was  one  which  so 
defined  and  limited  the  offence,  that  it  could  not  well  be  abused  to 
the  purposes  of  tyranny.     It  is  found  in  the  36th  section  of  the  act : 


81      • 

I XXXVI.  Provided  always,  and  be  it  enacted  by  the  authority  afore- 
said, that  such  person  or  persons  to  whom  your  highness,  your  heirs  or 
successors,  shall  hereafter  by  letters  patent,  under  the  great  seal  of  En- 
gland, give  authority  to  have  or  execute  any  jurisdiction,  power,  or  au- 
thority spiritual,  or  to  visit,  reform,  order,  or  correct  any  errors,  heresies, 
schisms,  abuses,  or  enormities  by  virtue  of  this  act,  shall  not  in  any- 
wise have  autliority  or  power  to  order,  determine,  or  adjudge  any 
matter  or  cause  to  be  heresy,  but  only  such  as  heretofore  have  been 
determined,  ordered,  or  adjudged  to  be  heresy,  by  the  authority  of  the 
canonical  Scriptures,  or  by  the  first  four  general  councils,  or  any  of 
them,  or  by  any  other  general  council,  wherein  the  same  was  declared 
heresy,  by  the  express  and  plain  words  of  the  said  canonical  scrip- 
tures, or  such  as  hereafter  shall  be  ordered,  judged,  or  determined  to 
be  heresy,  by  the  high  court  of  Parliament  of  this  realm,  with  the  as- 
sent of  the  clergy  in  their  convocation  ;  anything  in  this  act  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding.     [Ibid^  p.  425,  Sec.  XXXVI.) 

"  The  ground  of  making  this  limitation,"  says  Gibson,  "  was  a 
retrospect  to  the  times  of  popery,  in  which  everything  was  adjudged 
to  be  heresy  that  the  Church  of  Rome  thought  fit  to  call  by  that 
name,  how  far  soever,  in  its  own  nature,  from  he'mg  fundamental,  and 
how  contrary  soever  to  the  gospel  and  the  ancient  doctrine  of  the 
Catholic  Church ;  such  as  speaking  against  pilgrimages,  against  the 
worship  of  images,  against  the  necessity  of  auricular  confessions,  and 
the  lii<e."  No  trap  like  that  of  the  "  canonical  decrees,"  is  set  for 
the  unwary ;  the  rule  for  the  determination  of  heresy  is  made  to  be 
the  same  as  that  adopted  by  the  emperors  of  Christian  Rome,  a  rule 
founded  in  reason  and  equity  ;  viz.,  the  original  records  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  as  held  and  explained  by  the  common  and  universal 
sense  of  the  Christian  Church  ;  in  other  words,  the  decrees  of  the  only 
really  oecumenical  councils  ;  or  the  plain  and  express  declarations  of 
Holy  Scripture;  or,  the  concurrent  voice  of  the  clergy  and  laity  of  the 
nation. 

Nothing,  as  it  seems  to  me,  is  wanting  to  bring  this  statute  into 
harmony  with  liberty  of  conscience,  as  distinguished  from  the  re- 
straints of  tyranny  on  the  one  hand,  and  from  the  wayward  humors 
of  men  on  the  other,  except  the  prohibition  of  temporal  penalties  for 
errors  of  opinion.  Unhappily  this  prohibition  was  wanting,  and 
Christian  England  in  consequence  presented,  both  in  this  and  the  foi- 
lowing  reign,  several  examples  of  punishment  for  opinion,  which  can- 
not be  justified.  This  most  cruel  and  disgraceful  stain  on  the  English 
law,  however,  was  wiped  out  by  29  Charles  II.,  cap,  9,  on  which 
Bishop  Gibson  has  a  note,  which  sufficiently  shows  the  state  and  po. 
sition  of  the  Church  of  England  ;  "  Upon  the  abrogating  of  all  the 

6 


82 

ancient  statutes  made  against  hereticks,  the  cognisance  of  heresie  and 
punishment  of  hereticks  returned  into  its  ancient  channel  and  bounds; 
and  now  belongs  to  the  Archbishop,  as  metropolitan  of  the  province, 
and  to  every  bishop  within  his  own  proper  diocese,  who  are  to  punish 
only  by  ecclesiastical  censures,"     [Ibid,  p,  427.) 

Thus  in  the  treatment  of  heresy,  the  Church  of  Christ,  after  being 
tossed  for  centuries  on  an  ocean  of  strife  and  blood,  is  restored  in 
England,  and  through  the  labors  of  the  Church  of  England,  to  the 
apostolic  rule ;  him  that  is  an  heretic,  reject  and  avoid  \  deal  with  him 
by  spiritual  censures,  but  lay  not  on  him  the  hand  of  secular  power : 
neither  give  the  name  o^  heresy  (Avhich  consists  in  the  denial  of  some 
fundamental  point  of  the  Christian  faith)  to  every  opinion  supposed 
to  be  erroneous,  lest  your  zeal  against  it  involve  you  unconsciously 
in  acts  of  oppression  and  tyranny  ;  nor  yet  resolve  it  into  a  difterence 
of  private  opinion,  lest,  while  you  thus  cause  it  to  evaporate,  you  be 
found  to  deny  the  objective  reality  of  the  Christian  faith ;  but  lock 
upon  it  as  a  real  evil;  make  the  plain  words  of  Scripture  and  the 
judgment  of  the  Universal  Church  the  criterion  for  its  detection, 
and  express  your  displeasure  of  it  only  by  spiritual  censures.  This, 
if  I  rightly  read  the  above  statutes,  is  the  ground  of  the  Church  of 
England  ;  and,  on  this  ground,  Esto  perpetua  ! 


U.—Paffe  11. 

The  following  account  of  the  bishops  that  were  deprived  under 
Elizabeth,  and  of  the  treatment  which  they  received,  is  from  Bishop 
Burnet's  History  of  the  Reformation.  I  have  compared  it  with  Dr. 
Lingard,  vol.  vii.,  note  H.,  on  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  and  I  have  also 
compared  Lingard's  statement  with  the  account  of  the  deprived 
bishops  in  the  "  Execution  for  treason,"  &;c.,  of  Burleigh,  the  lord 
treasurer  un,der  Elizabeth,  and  with  the  more  minute  account  of  them 
by  Bishop  Andrewes  (who  may  also  be  regarded  as  a  contemporary 
witness,)  Tortura  Torti,  pp.  146,  147,  London,  1609  ;  and  have  no 
fear  that  the  correctness  of  Burnet's  narrative  on  this  point  will  be 
impeached. 

"When  the  Parliament  was  over,  the  oath  of  supremacy  was  soon 
after  put  to  the  bishops  and  clergy.  They  thought,  if  they  could 
stick  close  to  one  another  in  refusing  it,  the  queen  would  be  forced  to 
dispense  with  them,  and  would  not,  at  one  stroke,  turn  out  all  the 


83 

bishops  in  England.  It  does  not  appear  how  soon  after  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  Parliament  the  oath  was  put  to  them ;  but  it  was  not  long 
after;  for  the  last  collation  Bonner  gave  of  any  benefice,  was  on  the 
6th  May  this  year,  (1559.)  The  oath  being  offered  to  Heath,  Arch- 
bishop of  York ;  to  Bonner  of  London  ;  Thirleby  of  Ely  ;  Bourn,  of 
Bath  and  Wells ;  Christopherson  of  Chichester ;  Bain  of  Lichfield ; 
White  of  Winchester,  and  Watson  of  Lincoln  ;  Oglethorpe  of  Carlisle  ; 
Tuberville  of  Exeter  ;  Pool  of  Peterburg;  Scot  of  Chester;  Pates  of 
Worcester ;  and  Goldwell  of  St.  Asaph  ;  they  did  all  refuse  to  ttvke  it ; 
so  that  only  Kitchen,  Bishop  of  Landaft',  took  it.  There  was  some  hope 
of  Tonstall  ;  so  it  was  not  put  to  him  till  September;  but  he  being 
very  old,  chose  to  go  out  with  so  much  company,  more  for  the  decen- 
cy of  things,  than  out  of  any  scruple  he  could  have  about  the  supre- 
macy for  which  he  had  formerly  writ  so  much.  They  were  upon  their 
refusal  put  in  prison  for  a  little  while ;  but  they  had  all  their  liberty 
soon  after,  except  Bonner,  White  and  Watson.  There  were  great 
complaints  made  against  Bonner,  that  he  had,  in  many  things,  in  the 
prosecution  of  those  that  were  presented  for  heresie,  exceeded  what  the- 
law  allowed;  so  that  it  was  much  desired  to  have  him  made  an  ex- 
ample; but  as  the  queen  was  of  her  own  nature  merciful,  so  the 
reformed  divines  had  learned  in  the  gospel,  not  to  render  evil  for  evil, 
nor  to  seek  revenge ;  and  as  Nazianzen  had  of  old  exhorted  the  or- 
thodox, when  they  had  got  an  emperor  that  favoured  them,  not  to  retal- 
iate on  Arians  for  their  former  cruelties ;  so  they  thought  it  was  for 
the  honour  of  their  religion  to  give  this  real  demonstration  of  the 
conformity  of  their  doctrine,  to  the  rules  of  the  gospel  and  of  the 
Primitive  Church,  by  avoiding  all  cruelty  and  severity,  when  it  looked 
like  revenge. 

"All  this  might  have  been  expected  from  such  a  queen,  and  such 
bishops  ;  but  it  shewed  a  great  temper  in  the  whole  nation,  that  such 
a  man  as  Bonner  had  been,  was  suffered  to  go  about  in  safety,  and 
was  not  made  a  sacrifice  to  the  revenge  of  those  who  had  lost  their 
near  friends  by  his  means.  Many  things  were  brought  against  him  and 
White,  and  some  other  bishops ;  upon  which  the  queen  promised  to 
give  a  charge  to  the  visitors,  whom  she  was  to  send  over  England,  to  en- 
quire into  these  things  ;  and  after  she  had  heard  their  report,  she  said  she 
would  proceed  as  she  saw  cause  ;  by  this  means  she  did  not  deny 
justice,  but  gained  a  little  time  to  take  off  edge  that  was  on  men's 
spirits,  who  had  been  much  provoked  by  the  ill  usage  they  had  met 
with  from  them. 

"Heath  was  a  man  of  a  generous  temper,  and  so  was  well  used  by 
the  queen ;  for  as  he  w' as  sutTered  to  live  securely  at  his  own  house  in 
Surrey,  so  she  w^ent  thither  sometimes  to  visit  him.  Tonstall  and 
Thirleby  lived  in  Lambeth  with  Parker,  with  great  freedom  and  ease  ; 
the  one  was  learned  and  good  natured,  the  other  was  a  man  of  busi- 
ness ;  but  too  easie  and  flexible.  White  and  Watson  were  morose, 
sullen  men  ;  to  which  their  studies,  as  well  as  their  tempers,  had  dis- 
posed them,  for  they  were  much  given  to  scholastical  divinity,  which 
inclined  men  to  be  cynical,  to  overvalue  themselves,  and  despise 
others.     Christopherson  was  a  good  Grecian,  and  had  translated  Eu- 


84 

sebius  and  the  other  Church  historians  into  Latin,  but  with  as  little 
fidelity  as  may  be  expected  from  a  man  violently  addicted  to  a 
party ;  Bain  was  learned  in  the  Hebrew,  which  he  had  pro- 
fessed at  Paris,  in  the  reign  of  Francis  the  I.  All  these  chose 
to  live  still  in  England ;  only  Pates,  Scot  and  Goldwell,  went 
beyond  sea ;  after  them  went  the  lord  Morley,  Sir  Francis  Engle- 
field,  Sir  Ptobert  Peckham,  Sir  Thomas  Shelly  and  Sir  John  Gage,  who, 
it  seems,  desired  to  live  where  they  might  have  the  free  exercise  of 
their  religion ;  and  such  was  the  queen's  gentleness,  that  this  was  not 
denied  them,  tho'  such  favour  had  not  been  shewed  in  Queen  Marie's 
reign.  Fecknam,  Abbot  of  Westminster,  was  a  charitable  and  gen- 
erous man,  and  lived  in  great  esteem  in  England,  Most  of  the 
monks  returned  to  a  secular  course  of  life,  but  the  nuns  went  beyond 
sea."     {Burnet's  Reform,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  396,  397,  fol.     London,  1683.) 


\.—Page  12. 

On  Elizabeth's  accession  to  the  throne,  A.  D.  1558,  among  other 
announcements  to  foreign  powers,  she  "  sent  to  Sir  Edward  Karn, 
who   had  been  Queen  Mary's  resident  at  Eoriie,  to  give  the  Pope 
news  of  the  succession.     The  haughty  Pope  (Paul  IV)  received  it  in 
his  ordinary  style,  declaring,    '  That  England  was  held  in  fee  of  the 
Apostolick  See ;  that  she  could  not  succeed  being  illegitimate,  nor  could 
he  contradict  the  declarations  made  in  that  matter  by  his  predecessors, 
Clement  the  VII.  and  Paul  the  III.      He  said,  it  was  great  boldness 
in  her  to  assume  the  crown  without  his  consent ;  for  which  in  reason 
she   deserved  no  favour  at  his  hands  ;  yet,  if  she  would  renounce 
her  pretensions,  and  refer  herself  wholly  to  him,  he  would  shew  a 
fatherly  affection  to  her,  and  do  everything  for  her  that  could  consist 
with  the  dignity  of  the  Apostolick  See.'      When  she  heard  of  this, 
she  was  not  much  concerned  at  it ;  for  she  had  written  to  Karn  as 
she  did  to  her  other  ministers,  and  had  renewed  his  powers  upon  her 
first  coming  to  the  crown,  being  unwilling  in  the  beginning  of  her 
reign  to  provoke  any  party  against  her  ;  but  hearing  how  the  Pope 
received  this  address,  she  recalled  Karn's  powers,  and  commanded 
him  to  come  home.     The  Pope  on  the  other  hand  required  him  not 
to  go  out  of  Rome,  but  to  stay  and  take  care  of  an  hospital  over 
which  he  set  him;  which  it  was  thought  that  Karn  procured  to  him- 
self, because  he  was  unwilling  to  return  into  England,  apprehending 
the  change  of  religion  that  might  follow,  for  he  was  himself  zealously 


85 

addicted  to  the  see  of  Rome."     {Burnefs  History  of  the  Reformation, 
vol.  ii.  p.  374,  folio  edition.) 

The  first  complaint  of  these  proceedings  came  not  from  England, 
but  from  Rome  itself.  For  the  succeeding  Pope,  Pius  IV.,  coming 
the  next  year  to  the  papacy,  condemned  the  mad  and  insolent 
answer  which  his  predecessor  had  made  to  the  address  of  the  Queen 
of  England;  and  to  prove  his  sincerity,  "  sent  one  Parpalia  to  her, 
in  the  second  year  of  her  reign,  to  invite  her  to  joyn  herself  to  that 
see,  and  he  would  disannul  the  sentence  against  her  mother's  marriage 
confirm  the  English  service,  and  the  use  of  the  Sacrament  in  both 
kinds ;  but  she  sent  the  agent  word  to  stay  at  Brussels,  and  not  to 
come  over.  The  same  treatment  met  Abbot  Martinengo,  who  was 
sent  the  year  after  with  the  like  message.  From  that  time,  all  treaty 
with  Rome  was  entirely  broken  off."     {Ibid,  p.  417.) 

"However,  the  next  year  the  Pope  renews  his  applications,  and 
sends  another  Nuncio,  viz  :  Abbot  Martinengo  alias  Martinego,  who 
(it  is  said)  staid  in  Flanders  till  he  sent  to  ask  leave  to  be  admitted 
into  the  kingdom  ;  but  the  queen  saw  it  not  safe  to  admit  him,  think- 
ing it  implied  a  tacit  acknowledgment  of  the  Pope's  usurped  su- 
premacy, whereof  he  was  now  justly  deprived  by  act  of  Parliament, 
and  withal,  she  considered  what  advantages  the  Popes  have  always 
made  to  themselves  from  the  smallest  concession  ;  and  that  which 
(doubtless)  increased  the  queen's  dislike  to  the  Nuncio's  entrance 
was,  that  the  very  noise  of  his  coming  had  so  wrought  upon  some 
papists,  that  they  not  only  openly  violated  the  laws  made  against  the 
Pope  and  his  authority  in  former  reigns,  but  spread  folse  reports, 
that  the  queen  was  at  a  point  to  change  her  religion,  and  alter  the 
government  of  the  realm  ;  whilst  others  practised  with  the  devil  by 
conjurations,  charms,  and  casting  figures,  to  be  informed  of  the 
length  of  her  reign ;  and  at  the  same  time  the  Pope's  legate  being  in 
Ireland,  not  only  joined  himself  to  some  desperate  traytors,  who  were 
employed  in  stirring  up  rebellion  there,  but  as  much  as  in  him  was, 
deprived  her  majesty  of  all  right  and  title  to  that  kingdom.  Add  to 
all  this,  that  there  was  a  law  as  ancient  as  Henry  the  II.'s  time,  which 
commands  that  if  any  one  be  found  bringing  in  the  Pope's  letters 
or  mandate,  let  him  be  apprehended,  and  let  justice  pass  upon  him 
without  delay,  as  a  traytor  to  the  king  and  kingdom.  Upon  these 
and  other  considerations  the  Nuncio  was  denied  entrance."  {Gibson^ s 
Tracts,  vol.  iii.,  tit.  xiii.,  with  references.) 

That  Pius  IV.  dispatched  Vincentio  Parpalia,  Abbot  of  St.  Saviour, 
to  the  Queen  of  England,  with  a  flattering  letter,  and  with  secret  in- 
structions of  some  sort  or  other,  is  certain,  and  that  these  secret  instruc- 
tions pledged  the  see  of  Rome  to  approve  the  English  Liturgy  on 
condition  of  the  queen's  acknowledging  the  Pope's  jurisdiction  in  En- 


86 

gland,  is  also  rendered  pretty  certain  from  the  researches  and  statement 
of  Burnet,  especially  when  taken  in  connection  with  the  Pope's  letter, 
which  the  reader  may  be  pleased  to  peruse : 

To  our  most  dear  Daughter  in  Christ,  Elizabeth,  Queen  of  England. 

Our  most  dear  Daughter  in  Christ,  greeting,  and  Apostolicall  Benedic- 
tion :  How  greatly  we  do  desire  (according  as  our  Pastorall  office 
requireth)  to  take  care  of  your  Salvation,  and  to  provide  as  well  for 
your  Honour  as  the  establishment  of  your  Kingdome,  both  God  the 
searcher  of  our  hearts  knoweth,  and  you  yourself  may  understand  by 
the  instructions  which  we  have  given  to  this  our  beloved  son,  Vincen- 
tio  Parpalia,  Abbot  of  Saint  Saviour,  a  man  known  unto  you,  and  of 
us  well  approved,  to  be  by  him  imparted  unto  you.  We  do  therefore 
(most  dear  daughter)  exhort  and  admonish  your  highness  again  and 
again,  that,  rejecting  bad  counsellors  which  love  not  you  but  them- 
selves, and  serve  their  own  desires,  you  would  take  the  fear  of  God 
to  counsell,  and  acknowledge  the  time  of  your  visitation,  obeying  our 
fatherly  admonitions  and  wiiolesome  advices;  and  promise  to  yourself 
all  things  concerning  us  which  you  shall  desire  of  us,  not  onely  for 
the  salvation  of  your  soul,  but  also  for  the  establishing  and  confirming 
of  yourroyall  dignity,  according  to  the  authority,  place  and  function 
committed  unto  us  by  God,  who  if  you  return  into  the  bosome  of  the 
Church,  (as  we  wish  and  hope  you  will)  are  ready  to  receive  you 
with  the  same  love,  honour  and  rejoicing,  wherewith  that  father  in 
the  gospel  received  his  son  that  returned  unto  him.  Although  our 
joy  shall  be  so  much  the  greater  than  his,  in  that  he  rejoyced  for  the 
salvation  of  one  son  only  ;  but  you,  drawing  with  you  all  the  people 
of  England,  shall  not  only  by  your  own  salvation,  but  also  by  the 
salvation  of  the  whole  nation,  replenish  us  and  all  our  brethren  in 
generall  (whom  God  willing,  you  shall  hear  shortly  to  be  congregated 
in  an  Qllcumenicall  Councill  for  abolishing  of  heresies,)  and  the  whole 
Church  with  joy  and  gladness  ;  yea,  you  shall  also  glad  heaven  itself, 
and  purchase  by  so  memorable  a  fact  admirable  glory  to  }'our  name, 
and  a  much  more  renowned  crown  than  that  which  you  wear.  But  of 
this  matter  the  same  Vincentio  shall  treat  with  you  more  at  large, 
and  shall  declare  unto  you  our  fatherly  affection,  whom  we  pray  your 
highness  that  you  will  graciously  receive,  diligently  hear,  and  give 
the  same  credit  to  his  speech  which  you  would  doe  to  ourself.  Giv- 
en at  Rome,  at  Saint  Peter's,  etc.,  the  15th  day  of  May,  15G0,  in  our 
first  year.     {Camden,  p.  46.) 

Here  the  Pope  assures  the  queen  that  she  may  promise  to  herself 
concerning  him,  all  things  that  she  could  desire  of  him,  not  only  for 
the  salvation  of  her  soul,  but  also  "/or  the  establishment  and  confirm- 
ing of  her  royal  dignity,^''  according  to  the  authority,  &;c.,  committed 
to  him  by  God.  Certainly  the  queen's  honour  and  dignity  were  most 
deeply  concerned  in  maintaining  the  order  which  had  been  so  delibex" 


87 

ately  established,  and  therefore  the  Pope  can  hardly  be  understood  to 
mean  less  than  that  he  would  sanction  the  changes  which  had  been 
made  in  the  Church  of  England,  provided  she  would  acknowledge  his 
supremacy.  There  is  nothing,  I  apprehend,  in  the  changes  themselves, 
to  make  such  a  proposition  incredible,  (for  rather  than  lose  the 
brightest  gem  in  his  crown,  and  tlie  usurped  right  of  confirming  the 
English  bishops  in  their  jurisdiction,  the  Pope  would  have  been  con- 
tent not  only  to  concede  the  marriage  of  priests,  and  communion  in 
both  kinds,  for  which  he  could  find  precedents,  but  even  to  receive 
and  allow,  as  some  of  his  followers  have  since  done,  the  XXXIX  Arti- 
cles themselves,)  and  much  in  the  antecedents  of  the  papacy  to  render 
it  probable ;  it  having  ever  been  the  systematic  policy  of  the  Roman 
see,  and  one  great  means  of  attaining  to  the  power  which  it  then 
wielded,  when  it  oould  neither  sell  nor  retain  anything  in  dispute,  to 
give  it,  that  the  gift  may  serve  as  a  precedent  in  after  time  for  the 
right  of  the  said  see  to  dispose  of  the  same  at  its  pleasure. 

If  the  reader  desire  any  farther  proof  than  the  strong  presumption, 
afforded  by  the  letter  of  the  Pope,  and  confirmed  by  the  statement  of 
Burnet,  he  may  have  it  from  Sir  Edward  Coke,  who  has  averred  the 
fact,  and  declared  that  he  himself  received  his  information  directly 
from  the  queen.  I  take  this  account  from  Sir  Roger  Twisden,  (His- 
torical Vindication,  p.  176,  A.D.  1675,)  who  refers  to  a  charge  of  Sir 
Edward  Coke,  at  Norwich,  then  in  print.  Having  remarked  that  some 
had  objected  to  this  statement,  that  it  was  not  divulged  until  A.  D. 
1606,  or  46  years  after  the  information  was  alleged  to  have  been  re- 
ceived from  the  queen,  and  while  she  was  not  living  to  contradict 
it,  Sir  Roger  adds  :  "  For  the  being  first  mentioned  46  years  after,  that 
is  not  so  long  a  time,  but  many  might  remember  :  and  I  myself 
have  received  it  from  such  as  I  cannot  doubt  of  it,  they  having  had 
It  from  persons  of  nigh  relation  unto  them  who  were  actors  in  the 
managing  of  the  business.  Besides,  the  thing  itself  was  in  effect  print- 
ed many  years  before  ;  for  he  that  made  the  answer  to  Saunders  in  his 
seventh  book,  De  Visibili  Monarchia,  who  it  seems  had  been  very 
careful  to  gather  the  beginnings  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  that  there  might 
be  an  exact  history  of  her,  tandem  aliquando,  quia  omnia  acta  dili- 
genter  observavit,  qui  summis  reipublicte  negotiis  consulto  interfuit 
(by  one  who  had  been  a  careful  observer  of  events,  and  had  taken  part 
in  public  affairs,)  relates  it  thus  :  .._.....„, 

"That  a  nobleman  of  this  country  being  about  the  beginning  of 
tlie  queen's  reign  at  Rome,  Pius  IV.  asked  him  of  her  majesty's  cast- 


88 

ing  his  authority  out  of  England,  who  made  answer  that  she  did  itr 
being  perswaded  by  testimonies  of  Scripture,  and  the  laws  of  the  realm, 
nullam  illias  esse  in  terra  alienajurisdictionem,  [that  the  Pope  had  no 
jurisdiction  in  a  country  foreign  to  his  own  dominions ;]  which  the  Pope 
seemed  not  to  believe,  her  majesty  being  wise  and  learned,  but  did 
rather  think  the  sentence  of  that  court  against  her  mother's  marriage  to 
be  the  true  cause,  which  he  did  promise  not  only  to  retract,  sed  in  ejus 
gratiam  qua^cunque  possum  prasterea  facturum,  dura  ilia  ad  nostram 
ecclesiam  se  recipiat,  &<  debitum  mihi  primatus  titulum  reddat,  [bui 
will  do  moreover  whatever  I  can  in  her  favour,  provided  she  will 
return  to  our  Church  and  restore  to  me  the  due  title  of  the  primacy,] 
and  then  adds,  Extant  apud  nos  articuli  Abbatis  Sanctse  Salutis  raanu 
conswipti,  extant  Cardinalis  Moronro  literje,  quibus  nobilem  ilium  ve- 
hementer  hortabatur,  ut  eam  rem  nervis  omnibus  apud  reginara  nos- 
tram soUicitaret.  Extant  hodie  nobilium  nostrorum  aliquot,  quibus 
papa  multa  aureorum  millia  pollicitus  est,  ut  istius  amicitite  atque 
foederis  inter  Romanam  Cathedram  &  Elizabetham  serenissimara 
authores  essent ;  [that  is,  as  I  understand,  the  author  quoted  by  Twis- 
den  adds  ;  there  are  extant  among  us  the  articles  of  instruction  to  the 
Abbot  of  St.  Saviour,  written  in  the  Pope's  own  hand  ;  and  the  let- 
ter of  Cardinal  Morona,  in  which  he  exhorts  that  functionary  to  use 
all  his  influence  to  press  this  matter  with  our  queen  ;  and  there  are 
now  living  several  of  our  nobles  to  whom  the  Pope  made  large  pro- 
mises of  money,  provided  they  would  effect  the  desired  reconciliation 
and  friendship  between  the  Roman  see  and  our  most  gracious  Queen 
Elizabeth.]  This  I  have  cited  the  more  at  large,  for  that  Camden 
seems  to  think,  what  the  Abbot  of  St.  Saviour  propounded  was  not  in 
writing,  and  because  it  being  printed  seven  years  before  the  Cardinal 
Moronas'  death,  by  whose  privity  (as  protector  of  the  English)  this 
negotiation  past,  without  any  contradiction  from  Rome,  there  can  no 
doubt  be  made  of  the  truth  of  it.  And  assuredly,  some  who  have  con- 
veniency  and  leisure  may  find  more  of  it  than  hath  been  yet  divulged  ; 
for  I  no  way  believe  the  Bishop  of  Winchester  would  have  been  in- 
duced to  write,  it  did  constare  (it  was  true)  of  Paulus  IV.,  nor  the 
queen  herself,  and  divers  others  of  those  times,  persons  of  honour  and 
worth,  (with  some  of  which  I  myself  have  spoken)  have  affirmed  it  for 
an  undoubted  truth,  did  not  somewhat  more  remain  (or  at  least  had 
formerly  been)  than  a  single  letter  of  Pius  IV.,  which  apparently  had 
reference  to  matters  then  of  greater  privacy.  And  here  I  hold  it  not 
unworthy  a  place,  that  I  myself  talking  sometime  with  an  Italian  gen- 
tleman (verst  in  publick  affairs)  of  this  offer  from  the  Pope,  he  made 
much  scruple  of  believing  it ;  but  it  being  in  a  place  where  books 
were  at  hand,  I  shew'd  him  on  what  ground  I  spake,  and  asked  him 
if  he  thought  men  could  be  devils  to  write  such  an  odious  lie,  had  it 
not  been  so.  W^ell  (says  he)  if  this  M'ere  heard  in  Rome  amongst 
religious  men,  it  would  never  gain  credit ;  but  with  such  as  have  in 
their  hands  the  maneggi  della  corte,  [the  intrigues  of  the  court,]  (for 
that  was  his  expression)  it  may  be  held  true. 

"  Indeed,  the  former  author  doth  not  express  (as  perhaps  then  not 
so  fit  to  be  publisht)  the  particulars  those  articles  did  contain  were 


89 


writ  with  the  Abbot's  own  hand,  (which  later  pens  have  divulged,) 
but  that,  in  general,  it  should  be  any  thing  lay  in  the  Pope's  power,  on 
her  acknowledging  his  primacy  :  and  certain  no  other  could  by  him 
have  been  propounded  to  her,  nor  by  her  with  honour  accepted,  than 
that  of  his  allowing  the  English  Liturgy  :  so  that  they  who  agree  he 
did  by  his  agent  (according  to  his  letter)  make  propositions  unto  her, 
must  instance  in  some  particulars,  not  dishonourable  to  herself  and 
kinofdom  to  accept,  or  allow  what  these  writers  affirm  to  have  been 
thep.  And  I  have  seen,  and  heard  weighty  considerations,  why  her 
majesty  could  not  admit  her  own  reformation  from  Rome ;  some  with 
reference  to  this  Church  at  home,  as  that,  it  had  been  a  tacite  acknow- 
ledgment it  could  not  have  reformed  itself,  which  had  been  contrary 
to  all  former  precedents  ;  others  to  the  state  of  Christendom  as  it  then 
stood  in  Scotland,  Germany  and  France  :  but  with  this  I  have  not 
took  upon  me  to  meddle  here." 


J.— Page  19. 

"The  Liturgy,"  says  Camden,  in  the  first  year  of  Elizabeth,  "was 
forthwith  brought  into  the  churches  in  the  vulgar  tongue ;  images 
were  removed  without  tumult,  [and]  the  oath  of  supremacy  [was] 
offered  to  the  bishops  and  others  of  the  ecclesiastical  profession.  '^ 
*  *  As  many  as  refused  to  swear  were  turned  out  of  their  livings, 
dignities  and  bishoprics  ;  and  these,  he  proceeds  to  say,  amounted  in 
all  to  177,  the  fourteen  bishops  included."  Now,  from  this  fact,  that 
out  of  the  9,400  clergy  of  the  realm,  upwards  of  9,200  took  the 
oath  of  supremacy,  and  acquiesced  in  the  other  changes  above  indi- 
cated, I  think  it  fair  to  infer  that  the  great  body  of  the  people  con- 
tinued to  adhere  to  the  Church  after  it  was  reformed  from  popery, 
and  to  frequent  its  services  as  before.  The  same  may  also  be  inferred 
from  what  Camden  adds  soon  after  :  "Thus  was  religion  in  England 
changed,  whilst  all  Christendom  admired  that  it  was  wrought  so 
easily  and  without  commotion.  But,  indeed,  it  was  no  sudden  change, 
(which  is  never  lightly  endured),  but  slow  and  by  degrees.  For  (to 
repeat  summarily  what  I  have  sdid  before)  the  Romish  religion  stood 
a  full  month  and  more,  after  the  death  of  Queen  Mary,  in  the  same 
state  as  it  was  before.  The  27th  of  December  it  was  permitted  that  the 
Epistle,  Gospels,  Ten  Commandments,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Creed, 
and  the  Litany  should  be  used  in  the  vulgar  tongue.  The  22d  of  March, 
when  the  estates  of  the  realm  were  assembled,  by  the  renewing  of  a 
law  of  Edward  VI.,  was  granted  the  whole  use  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
to  wit,  under  both  kinds.     The  24th  of  June,  by  authority  of  an  act 


"  concerning  the  uniformity  of  Public  Prayer  and  Administration  o 
the  Sacraments,'  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass  was  abolished,  and  the 
liturgy  in  the  English  tongue  established.  In  the  month  of  July  the 
oath  of  supremacy  was  ministered  to  the  bishops  and  others :  and  in 
August  images  were  removed  out  of  the  churches,  broken  or  burnt." 
Thus  it  appears  that  the  most  important  of  the  changes  were,  one 
after  another,  "  permitted  "  and  "  granted,"  as  if  in  compliance«*?vith 
the  wishes  of  the  people,  and  that  they  were  acquiesced  in  by  the 
bishops,  who  did  not  revolt  until  the  tender  of  the  oath  of  supremacy, 
which,  however,  five  of  them,  viz.,  Heath,  Bonner,  Tonstall,  Bayne, 
and  Bourne  had  taken  twice  before,  viz.,  under  Henry  VIII.  and 
Edward  VI.  All  this,  combined  with  the  gradual  nature  of  the 
changes,  makes  it  so  apparent,  that  the  mass  of  the  people  remained 
in  the  Church,  that  there  is  little  need  of  direct  evidence  in  support  of 
the  fact.     Some  such  evidence,  however,  I  proceed  to  adduce : 

First,  I  give  the  declaration  of  Bramhall  {Just  Vindication,  vol.  i., 
p.  248),  who  was  born  in  the  same  century  :  "  For  divers  years,"  he 
says,  "  in  the  beginning  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign,  there  was  no  re- 
cusant known  in  England  ;  but  even  they  who  were  most  addicted 
to  Eoman  opinions,  yet  frequented  our  churches  and  public  assem- 
blies, and  did  join  with  us  in  the  use  of  the  same  prayers  and  divine 
offices,  without  any  scruple,  until  they  were  prohibited  by  a  Papal 
Bull,  merely  for  the  interest  of  the  Roman  Court." 

The  Roman  titular  Bishop  of  Chalcedon  having  affirmed  that  the 
statement  was  false,  Bramhall  replies:  "I  said,  that  'for  divers  years 
in  the  beginning  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign  there  were  no  recusants 
known  in  England,  until  papists  were  prohibited  by  a  Bull  to  join 
with  us  in  our  public  form  of  serving  God.'  This  he  saith  is  most  false. 
If  it  be  so,  [  am  more  sorry  ;  it  was  before  my  time.  But  I  have  no 
reason  to  believe  it  to  be  false.  If  I  had  the  use  of  such  books  as  I 
desire,  I  should  show  great  authors  for  it ;  and  as  it  is,  I  shall  produce 
some  not  to  be  contemned,  who  say  not  much  less.  First,  I  cite  a 
treatise  printed  at  London,  by  John  Day,  about  the  time  when  Pius 
V.'s  Bull  was  published  against  Queen  Elizabeth,  called  "  The  Dis- 
closing of  the  Great  Bull  that  roared  at  my  Lord  Bishop's  Gate," 
with  a  "  Declaratory  Addition"  to  the  same  : — "  In  hope  of  the  suc- 
cess of  this  Bull,  a  number  of  papists  that  sometimes  did  communi- 
cate with  us,  or  at  the  least  come  ordinarily  to  our  public  prayers, 
have  of  late  forborne."  With  which  author  Mr.  Camden  agreeth, 
who  saith,  that  "  the  more  modest  papists  did  foresee  a  heap  of 
miseries  hanging  over  their  heads,  by  the  means  of  this  Bull,  who 


91 

formerly  could  exercise  their  own  religion  securely  enough  within 
their  own  private  houses,  or  else,  without  any  scruple  of  conscience, 
were  content  to  go  to  Church  to  hear  the  English  service,"  The 
reason  of  this  indifFerency  and  compliance  is  set  down  by  one  of  their 
own  authors,  because  the  queen,  "  to  remove,  as  much  as  might  be, 
all  scruples  out  of  the  people's  heads,  and  to  make  them  think  that 
the  same  service  and  religion  continued  still,"  &c.,  "provided  that 
in  the  Common  Prayer  Book  there  should  be  some  part  of  the  old 
frame  still  upheld,"  &c,,  "  by  which  dextrous  management  of  affliirs 
the  common  people  were  instantly  lulled  asleep  and  complied  to 
every  thing."  {BramhalVs  Worls^  vol.  ii.,  pp.  245,246.) 

"  But  hear,"  says  Bishop  Andrewes  (T'oriJwra  Tort'i,  p.  149),  who  was 
chaplain  in  ordinary  to  Elizabeth,  and  who  had  just  before  remarked, 
"All  who  remember  the  first  eleven  years  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
will  declare  that  never  was  any  period  more  mild  and  gentle  than 
that;"  "  hear,"  he  says,  "  the  Jesuit  himself,  Philopatrus,  who,  in 
other  respects  one  of  our  revilers,  but  constrained  by  the  force 
of  truth,  thus  addresses  the  queen,  in  respect  to  the  beginning  of  her 
reign:  "While  in  the  beginning  of  your  reign, -you  dealt  some- 
what mildly  with  the  Catholics ;  while  yet  you  did  not  treat  them 
with  great  violence,  nor  greatly  urge  any  either  to  participation  of 
your  sect,  or  to  a  denial  of  the  ancient  faith,  all  things  seemed  to 
proceed  in  a  pretty  tranquil  course ;  no  great  complaints  were  heard  ; 
no  remarkable  dissention  or  opposition  was  manifested,  and  some 
there  were,  who  (although  the  thing  w^as  wrong),  in  order  to  please 
and  gratify  you,  frequented  your  churches  in  body  at  least,  though 
their  heart  was  not  there."  "  Here,"  continues  Andrewes,  "  you  read, 
painted  in  Jesuit  ink,  the  beginnings  of  the  reign  which  you  calum- 
niate. But,  observe,  that  it  is  envy  itself  which  utters  these  words, 
and  that,  therefore,  the  less  they  express,  the  more  they  mean.  And 
yet  you  hear  even  from  him  *  *  *  '  that  there  was  no  great 
dissention,'  and  that  even  of  those  who  were  Romanists  in  heart,  there 
were  some  that  actually  united  in  the  prayers  and  Divine  offices  of 
the  Reformed  Church."  * 


*  Audi  Philopatrnm  ipsum  Jesuitam,  insignem  alioqni  convitiatorem,  sed 
veritatis  vi  victum,  Reginam  de  Regni  sui  initijs  sic  alloquentem  :  Dum  initio 
Regni  tui  niitius  aliquanto  cum  Catholicis  ageres,  dum  nullum  adhuc  vehemen- 
tissime  urgeres,  nullum  admodum  premeres,  vel  ad  sectaj  tuae  participationem, 
vel  fidei  antiqua?  abnegationem,  omnia  sane  tranquilliore  cursu  incedere  vide- 
bantur,  nee  audiebantur  magnce  querela,  nee  insignis  aliqua  dissensio  aut  repug- 
nantia  cernebatur,  nee  deerant  fquamquam  malej  qui  Ecclesias  vestras,  ut  vobis 
placerent  ac  gratificarentur,  corpore  saltem,  etsi  non  animo  frequentabant.  Legis 
hie,  Jesuitico  atramento  depicta,  quae  tu  turn  sseva  calumniaris  Regni  Principia. 


92 

To  these  I  will  add  the  testimony  of  one  whose  veracity  is  unques- 
tionable, and  who  speaks  of  the  matters  that  happened  almost  withm 
his  own  recollection.  Lord  Coke,  in  the  case  of  Garnet,  says:  "The 
coming  of  this  Garnet  into  England  (which  very  act  was  a  treason), 
was  about  twenty  years  past,  viz.,  in  July,  1586,  in  the  twenty-eighth 
year  of  the  reign  of  the  late  queen,  of  famous  and  blessed  memory  ; 
whereas  the  year  before,  viz.,  the  twenty-seventh  year  of  Elizabeth, 
there  was  a  statute  made,  whereby  it  was  treason  for  any,  who  was 
made  a  Romish  priest,  by  any  authority  from  the  see  of  Rome, 
sithence  the  first  year  of  her  reign,  to  come  into  her  dominion  :  which 
statute  the  Romanists  calumniate  as  a  bloody,  cruel,  unjust,  and  a 
new  upstart  law,  and  abuse  that  place  of  our  Saviour,  '  0  Jerusalem, 
Jerusalem,  thou  that  killest  the  prophets,  and  stonest  them  which  are 
sent  unto  thee,'  Mat.  xxiii.,  37.,  to  that  purpose.  But,  indeed,  it  is 
both  mild,  merciful  and  just,  and  grounded  upon  the  ancient  funda- 
mental laws  of  England.  For  (as  hath  already  in  the  former  arraign- 
ments been  touched)  before  the  Bull  of  impius  Pius  Quintus,  in  the 
eleventh  year  of  the  queen,  wherein  her  majesty  was  excommunicated 
and  deposed,  and  all  they  accursed  who  should  yield  obedience  unto 
her,  there  were  no  recusants  in  England,  all  came  to  church,  (howso- 
ever popishly  inclined,  or  persuaded  in  most  points)  to  the  same  Divine 
service  we  now  use ;  but  thereupon,  presently,  they  refused  to  as- 
semble in  our  churches,  or  join  WMth  us  in  public  service,  not  for  con- 
science of  anything  there  done,  against  which  they  might  justly  except 
out  of  the  Word  of  God,  but  because  the  Pope  had  excommunicated 
and  deposed  her  majesty,  and  cursed  those  who  should  obey  her ;  and 
so  upon  this  Bull  ensued  open  rebellion  in  the  north,  and  many  garboils. 
But  see  the  event:  now  most  miserable  in  respect  of  this  Bull  was 
the  state  of  Romish  recusants,  for  either  they  must  be  hanged  for 
treason,  in  resisting  their  lawful  sovereign,  or  cursed  for  yielding  due 
obedience  unto  her  majesty.  And,  therefore,  of  this  Pope  it  was  said 
by  some  of  his  own  favorites,  that  he  was  Homo  pius  et  doctus,  sed 
nimis  credulus  ;  a  holy  and  learned  man,  but  over  credulous,  for  that 
he  was  informed  and  believed  that  the  strength  of  the  Catholics  in 
England  was  such  as  was  able  to  have  resisted  the  queen.     But 

At  tu,  audire  te  hie  existima  loquentem  invidiam  ipsam  ;  puta  auteni  minus  hie 
dici,  plus  intelligi.  Audis  taraen,  vel  ab  eo  neminem  admodum  turn  pressum,  non 
magnas  turn  querelas,  non  insignem  aliquam  dissensionem  extitisse :  non 
ergo  ita  tuni  refertos  carceres,  non  tot  Episcopos,  tot  nobilcs,  fortunis  omnibus 
exutos,  actos  in  exilium,  carceri  perpetuo  mancipatos.  Grade  saltern  huic 
testi ;  inimicus  homo  est,  nihil  in  gratiam  dicit :  crede  (inquam_)  vel  inimico 
huic  homini,  &  de  Regina  posthiEc  obmutesce. 


93 

when  the  Bull  was  found  to  take  such  an  effect,  then  was  there  a  dis- 
pensation given,  both  by  Pius  Quintus  himself,  and  Gregory  XIII., 
that  all  Catholics  might  show  their  outward  obedience  to  the  queen  : 
ad  redimandam  yexationem  et  ad  ostendendam  externam  obedien- 
tiam;  but  with  these  cautions  and  limitations:  1.  Rebus  sic  stan- 
tibus; things  to  stand  as  they  did.  2.  Donee  publica  bullce  executio 
fieri  possit ;  which  is  to  say  :  They  must  grow  into  strength,  until 
they  were  able  to  give  the  queen  a  mate,  that  the  public  execution  of 
the  Bull  might  take  place. 

"And  all  this  was  confessed  by  Garnet  under  his  own  hand,  and  now 
again  openly  confessed  at  the  bar."  {Rargrave's  State  Trials.  Trial 
of  Gavelet.) 

To  which  I  may  further  add  the  following  note  from  Gibbon's  "  De- 
cline and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  203,  (Harper, 
182(5 :)  "In  the  beginning  of  the  last  century,  [that  is,  (for  Gibbon 
wrote  in  the  eighteenth  century)  about  thirty  years  after  the  publica- 
tion of  Pius  V.'s  bull,]  the  Papists  of  England  were  only  a  thirtieth,  and 
the  Protestants  of  France  only  a  fifteenth  part  of  the  respective  na- 
tions to  whom  their  spirit  and  power  were  a  constant  object  of  appre- 
hension. See  the  relations  which  Bentivoglio,  (who  was  then  Nuncio 
at  Brussels,  and  afterwards  cardinal,)  transmitted  to  the  Court  of 
Rome.  (Relazione,  tom.  ii.,  pp.  211,241.)  Bentivoglio  was  curious, 
well  informed,  but  somewhat  partial." 


K.—Page  20. 

By  way  of  introduction  to  the  Bull  of  Pius  V.,  excommunicating 
and  deposing  Elizabeth,  and  stirring  up  her  subjects  to  revolt,  I  beg 
leave  to  offer  to  the  reader  a  brief  statement,  compiled  from  unques- 
tionable authorities,  which  throws  light  on  its  origin,  and  proves  it  to 
be  but  one  of  a  series  of  measures,  (of  which  the  reader  will  form 
his  own  opinion),  by  Avhich  the  Roman  see  sought  to  re-establish  its 
supremacy  in  England. 

There  is  a  Life  of  Pius  V.,  written  hy  Hieronymo  Catena,  and  printed 
at  Rome,  A.D.  1588,  with  the  privilege  of  Sixtus  V.  Camden,  in  his 
Annals  of  Elizabeth,  having  referred  to  Catena  as  "  an  author  for  his 
faithfulness  made  free  of  the  city  of  Rome,  and  Secretary  to  Cardinal 
Alexandrino,  Pius  V.'s  nephew,  gives  a  pretty  long  extract  from  this 


94 

work,  from  which  I  shall  .quote  what  chiefly  relates  to  my  present 
purpose. 

"Pius  v.,"  says  Catena,  "being  inflamed  with  zeal  for  restoring 
the  Ronlish  religion  in  England,  and  depriving  Queen  Elizabeth  of 
her  kingdom,  since  he  could  not  have  an  Apostolic  Nuncio,  or  any 
public  person  to  carry  on  these  matters,  procured  one  Robert 
Ridolpho,  a  gentleman  of  Florence  (who  lived  in  England  under 
color  of  merchandizing),  to  animate  men's  minds  to  work  the  destruc- 
tion of  Queen  Elizabeth,  which  he  diligently  performed,  not  only 
among  the  Catholics,  but  also  with  some  Protestants,  who  in  this  con- 
spired together,  some  out  of  private  hatred  to  those  that  aspired  to 
the  Crown,  and  others  affecting  innovations.  Whilst  these  things 
were  privately  acting,  there  happened  a  difference  between  the 
Spaniard  and  Queen  Elizabeth,  about  some  money  that  was  inter- 
cepted. From  hence  the  Pope  taking  occasion,  persuaded  the 
Spaniard  to  assist  the  conspirators  in  England  against  Queen  Eliza- 
beth, that  so  he  might  more  securely  carry  on  his  aflairs  in  the 
Netherlands,  and  the  Romish  religion  might  be  restored  in  Britain.'' 

Having  mentioned  the  intrigues  of  the  Pope  to  bring  the  French 
into  the  scheme,  and  some  other  particulars  of  the  conspiracy.  Catena 
proceeds :  "  The  Pope,  to  forward  the  matter,  published  a  Bull,  de- 
posed the  queen  from  her  crown,  and  absolved  her  subjects  from  all 
their  oaths  of  obedience,  sending  printed  copies  thereof  to  Ridolpho 
to  be  dispersed  all  over  England.  Hereupon  the  earls  of  Northum- 
berland and  Westmoreland  took  up  arms  against  their  prince ;  who 
soon  after,  for  lack  of  money,  withdrew  themselves  into  Scotland- 
Norfolk  and  others  were  committed  to  custody,  among  whom  was 
Ridolpho,  whom  the  Pope  had  commanded  to  furnish  the  conspirators 
with  an  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  crowns ;  which,  being  kept  in 
prison,  he  could  not  do. 

"  But,  foreasmuch  as  the  queen  could  not  discover  the  depth  of 
the  conspiracy,  he  with  the  rest  was  let  out  of  prison,,  and  then  dis- 
tributed those  crowns  among  the  conspirators;  who  sent  him  to  the 
Pope  to  give  him  notice  that  all  things  were  prepared  and  in  readiness 
at  home,  against  Queen  Elizabeth,  and  to  interest  the  Spaniard  forth- 
with to  assist  them  out  of  the  Low  Countries,  The  Pope  commended 
the  enterprise,"  etc. 

Catena  goes  on  to  state  that  the  Pope  sent  Ridolpho  to  the 
Spaniard,  under  another  pretence,  and  to  Portugal  with  instructions. 
"The  Spaniard  he  urged  to  aid  the  conspirators,  and  the  more  effec- 
tually to  persuade  him,  he  promised  to  go  himself  to  their  succor,  and, 


95 

if  need  were,  to  mortgage  all  the  goods  of  the  Apostolic  see,  chalices, 
crosses,  and  holy  vestments.  As  for  difficulty,  there  was  none  at  all 
in  it  if  he  would  send  Chapini  Vitelli  out  of  the  Netherlands  with  an 
army  into  England  ;  which  the  Spaniard  with  all  alacrity  commanded 
forthwith  to  be  done,  and  the  Pope  himself  provided  money  in  a 
readiness  in  the  Netherlands."  (See  Camden's  Miz.,  Anno  1572,  p. 
180,  of  the  3d  Eng.  edit.,  A.D.  1G75.) 

This  secret  distribution  of  the  Bull  by  Rldolpho  appears  to  have 
been  about  a  year  before  it  was  placarded  by  Felton  on  the  palace 
gate  of  the  Bishop  of  London.  Eor  the  Bull  was  not  made  public  in 
England  till  the  year  after  it  was  concocted  at  Rome ;  to  which  delay, 
by  the  by,  Saunders  (a  Roman  author  of  that  age),  in  his  treatise  on 
the  Visible  Monarchy  of  the  Church,  ascribes  the  ruin  of  the  hopeful 
rebellion.  For  having  remarked  that  "  Pius  V-.,  the  chief  bishop, 
A.D.  1569,  sent  a  reverend  priest,  Nicholas  Morton,  an  Englishman, 
into  England,  to  declare  to  certain  noblemen,  by  the  Apostolic  autho- 
rity, that  Elizabeth,  who  was  then  in  possession,  was  a  heretic;  and 
that  for  that  reason  she  had  fallen  from  all  dominion  and  power,  and 
was  to  be  regarded  by  them  as  a  heathen,  and  that  they  were  not  to  be 
compelled  to  obey  her  laws  or  mandates  ;"  he  adds, "  By  which  denun- 
ciation many  noblemen  were  led  to  attempt  the  liberation  of  their 
brethren,  and  they  hoped,  certainly,  that  all  Catholics  would  have  as- 
sisted them  with  all  their  strength ;  but,  although  the  matter  happened 
otherwise  than  they  expected,  because  all  the  Catholics  knew  not 
THAT  Elizabeth  was  declared  to  be  a  heretic,  yet  the  counsels 
and  intents  of  these  noblemen  were  to  be  praised  !" 

It  will  be  seen  by  the  above  extract  from  Catena,  that  the  Earls  of 
Northumberland  and  Westmoreland,  on  the  failure  of  their  abortive 
insurrection,  sent  to  the  Pope  to  give  him  notice  that  all  things  were 
in  readiness  for  a  new  outbreak.  One  is  naturally  desirous  to  know  in 
what  terms  the  pretended  Father  of  Christendom  responded  to  these 
two  promising  sons;  and  it  so  happens  that,  in  the  Life  of  Pius  V., 
by  Gabutius,  printed  at  Antwerp,  1640,  we  have  the  identical  letter 
which  his  Holiness  addressed  to  them.  From  this  letter,  (the  whole 
of  which  may  be  seen  in  Gibson's  Collection,  vol.  3d.  tit.  xiii.)  which 
is  addressed  "To  our  beloved  sons,  Thomas,  Earl  of  Northumber- 
land, and  Charles,  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  in  England,"  and  dated  at 
"Rome,  at  St.  Peter's,  under  the  Fisher's  Ring,  the  20th  day  of 
February,  1570,"  lam  content  to  make  the  following  extract : 

"  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  hath  by  you  (men  dear  to  us,  and 
eminent  as  well  by  the  study  of  Catholic  piety  as  by  nobleness  of 
birth,)  determined,  peradveuture,  to  renew  and  confirm  the  ancient 


96 

union  of  the  Roman  Church  with  that  kingdom  [England]  ;  and 
therefore  hath  infused  into  you  that  mind  most  worthy  of  the  zeal 
of  your  Catholic  faith,  that  you  should  attempt  to  redeem  back  that 
kingdom  (delivered  from  the  most  vile  servitude  of  a  woman's  lust) 
to  the  ancient  obedience  of  this  Holy  Roman  See.  Which  pious 
and  religious  endeavour  of  your  minds  we  commend  (as  is  fit)  with 
just  praises  in  the  Lord,  and  giving  it  that  our  blessing  which  you 
desire,  we  do  with  the  benignity  which  becomes  us,  receive  your 
honors  flying  to  the  protection  of  us,  and  of  this  Holy  See,  to  whose 
authoiity  they  subject  themselves  ;  exhorting  you  in  the  Lord,  and 
with  all  possible  earnestness  of  our  mind,  entreating  you  to  persevere 
constantly  in  this  your  so  exceeding  good  will  and  laudable  purpose. 
*  *  *  But  if,  in  asserting  the  Catholic  faith  and  authority  of 
this  Holy  See,  you  should  suffer  death,  and  your  blood  be  spilt ;  it 
would  be  much  better  for  the  confession  of  God,  to  fly  by  the  com- 
pendium of  a  glorious  death  to  life  eternal,  than  living  basely  and 
ignominiously,  to  serve  the  lust  of  an  impotent  woman  with  the  loss 
of  your  souls." 

In  effect  this  Roman  "  Saint"  (for  Pius  V.  was  canonized,  A.  D. 
1712)  adds  a  ninth  to  the  eight  benedictions  of  the  gospel :  "  Blessed 
are  they  who  for  my  sake  shall  die  as  traitors  on  earth,  for  they  shall 
be  crowned  as  martyrs  in  heaven." 

The  policy  here  marked  out  was  not  peculiar  to  Pius  V.  Pope 
Gregory  Xlll.  afterwards  renewed  the  same  Bull  of  excommunication 
and  deposition  against  Elizabeth,  probably  at  the  time  when  he  was 
intriguing  to  procure  the  kingdom  of  Ireland  for  his  base-born  son. 
(See  Camden's  Eliz.,  Anno  1578).  It  was  again  renewed  by  Pope 
Sixtus  V.  ;  who,  "  that  he  might  not  seem  to  be  wanting  to  the  cause, 
sending  Cardinal  Allen,  an  Englishman,  into  the  Low  Countries, 
renewed  the  bulls  declaratory  of  Pius  Quintus  and  Gregory  Thir- 
teenth, excommunicated  the  queen,  dethroned  her,  absolved  her  sub- 
jects from  all  allegiance,  and  published  his  crusade  in  print,  as  it  were 
against  Turks  and  Infidels,  wherein,  out  of  the  treasury  of  the 
Church,  he  granted  plenary  indulgences  to  all  that  gave  him  help  and 
assistance." 

Strange,  that  in  the  face  of  these  and  other  like  facts  of  history, 
there  are  men  even  now  to  be  found,  who  hope  that  the  Roman  see 
may  become  a  central  and  controlling  power  among  the  nations  of  the 
earth,  for  harmonizing  their  disputes  by  force  of  reason,  and  prevent- 
ing appeals  to  the  sword  !  At  least  I  have  heard  the  vision  fondly 
confessed,  not  indeed  by  Romanists  or  Churchmen,  but  among  the 
amiable  descendants  of  the  Puritans  in  the  bosom  of  New-England. 
I  suppose,  because,  having  pricked  the  bladder  of  Peace  Societies, 
they  were  impatient  to  soar  upward  in  a  new  balloon  of  grander 
dimensions. 


97 

But  I  am  detaining  the  reader  from  the  Bull  of  Pius,  (the  gospel 
according  to  the  papacy,)  which  I  transcribe  from  Camden's  Eliza- 
beth, Anno  1570  ;  a  Bull  which  has  never  been  revoked,  and  which  is, 
therefore,  as  much  the  act  of  the  Roman  see  to-dav,  as  when  it  was 
first  issued, 

Pius,  Bishop,  Servant  to  God's  Servants, 

for  a  future  memorial  of  the  matter. 

"He  that  reigneth  on  high,  to  whom  is  given  all  power,  in  heaven 
and  in  earth,  hath  committed  His  one  Holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church,  out  of  which  there  is  no  salvation,  to  one  alone  upon  earth, 
namely,  to  Peter,  the  chief  of  the  apostles,  and  to  Peter's  successor, 
the  Bi.shop  of  Rome,  to  be  by  him  governed  with  plenary  authority. 
Him  alone  hath  he  made  prince  over  all  people  and  all  kingdoms, 
to  pluck  up,  destroy,  scatter,  consume,  plant  and  build  ;  that  he  may 
preserve  Ms  faithful  people  (knit  together  with  the  band  of  charity) 
in  the  unity  of  the  spirit,  and  present  them  spotless  and  unblamable 
to  their  Saviour,  Jn  discharge  of  which  function,  we,  who  are,  by 
God's  goodness,  called  to  the  government  of  the  aforesaid  Church,  do 
spare  no  pains,  labouring  with  all  earnestness,  that  unity  and  the 
Catholic  religion  (which  the  Author  thereof  hath,  for  the  trial  of  his 
children's  fliith,  and  for  our  amendment,  suffered  to  be  tossed  with  so 
great  afflictions)  might  be  preserved  sincere.  But  the  number  of 
the  ungodly  hath  gotten  such  power,  that  there  is  now  no  place  in  the 
whole  world  left  which  they  have  not  essayed  to  corrupt  with  their 
most  wicked  doctrines  ;  and,  amongst  others,  Elizabeth,  the  pretended 
Queen  of  England,  the  servant  of  wickedness,  lendeth  thereunto  her 
helping  hand,  with  whom,  as  in  a  sanctuary,  the  most  pernicious  per- 
sons have  found  a  refuge.  This  very  woman  having  seized  on  the 
kingdom,  and  monstrously  usurped  the  place  of  Supreme  Head  of 
the  Church  in  all  England,  and  the  chief  authority  and  jurisdiction 
thereof,  hath  again  reduced  the  said  kingdom  into  a  miserable  and 
ruinous  condition,  which  was  so  lately  reclaimed  to  the  Catholic  faith 
and  thriving  condition. 

"  For  having  by  strong  hand  prohibited  the  exercise  of  the  true 
religion,  which  Mary,  the^  lawful  queen  of  famous  memory,  had  by 
the  help  of  this  See  restored,  after  it  had  been  formerly  overthrown 
by  Henry  the  Eighth,  a  revolter  therefrom,  and  following  and  em- 
bracing the  errors  of  heretics,  she  hath  changed  the  royal  council, 
consisting  of  the  English  nobility,  and  filled  it  up  with  obscure  men, 
being  heretics  ;  suppressed  the  embracers  of  the  Catholic  faith  ;  con- 
stituted lewd  preachers  and  ministers  of  impiety;  abolished  the 
sacrifice  of  the  mass,  prayers,  fastings,  choice  of  meats,  unmarried 
life,  and  the  Catholic  rites  and  ceremonies;  commanded  books  to  be 
read  through  the  whole  realm,  containing  manifest  heresy,  and  ap- 
pointed impious  rites  and  institutions,  by  herself  entertained  and 
observed  according  to  the  prescript  of  Calvin,  to  be  likewise  observed 
by  her  subjects  ;   presumed  to  eject  bishops,  parsons  of  churches, 

7 


98 

and  other  Catholic  priests,  out  of  their  churches  and  benefices,  and  to 
bestow  them  and  other  church-livings  upon  heretics,  and  to  determine 
of  Church    causes;    prohibited  the   prelates,    clergy  and   people   to 
acknowledge  the  Church  of  Rome,  or  obey  the  precepts  and  canonical 
sanctions  thereof ;  compelled  most  of  them  to  condescend  to  wicked 
laws,  and  to  abjure  the  authority  and  obedience  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
and  to  acknowledge  her  to  be  sole  Lady  in  temporal  and  spiritual  mat- 
ters, and  this  by  oath  ;  imposed  penalties  and  punishments  upon  those 
which  obeyed  not,  and  exacted  them  of  those  which  persevered  in  the 
unity  of  the  faith  and  their  obedience  aforesaid ;  cast  the  Catholic 
prelates  and  rectors  of  churches  into   prison,   where  many  of  them, 
being  worn  out  with  long  languishing  and  sorrow,  miserably  ended 
their  lives.     All  which  things  being  so  manifest  and  notorious  to  all 
nations,  and  by  the  serious  testimony  of  \evy  many  so  substantially 
proved,  that  there  is  no  place  at  all  left  for  excuse,  defence,  or  evasion  : 
We,  seeing  that  impieties   and  wicked  actions  are   multiplied,  one 
upon  another,  as  also  that  the  persecution  of  the  faithful  and  affliction 
for  religion  groweth  every  day  heavier  and   heavier,  through  the  in- 
stigation and  by  the  means  of  the  said  Elizabeth  ;  and  since  we  under- 
stand her  heart  to  be  so  hardened  and  obdurate,  that  she  hath   not 
only   contemned   the   godly  requests  and    adiiionitions  of   Catholic 
princes,  concerning  her  cure  and  conversion,  but  also  hath  not  so 
much  as  suffered  the  Nuncios  of  this  See  to  cross   the  seas  for   this 
purpose  into   England,  are  constrained   of  necessity  to   betake  our- 
selves of  the  weapons  of  justice  against  her,  being   heartily  grieved 
and  sorry  that  we  are  compelled   thus  to  punish  one  to  whose  ances- 
tors the  whole  state  of  Christendom   hath  been  so   much  beholden. 
Being,  theref)re.  supported  with  Ilis  authority,  whose  pleasure  it  was 
to  place  us  (though  unable  for  so  great  a  burthen)  in  this  supreme 
throne  of  justice,  we  do,  out  of  the  fulness   of  our  apostolic  power, 
declare  the  aforesaid  Elizabeth  as  being   a  heretic  and   favourer  of 
heretics  ;  and  her  adherents  in  the  matters  aforesaid  to  have  incurred 
the  sentence  of  excommunication,  and   to  be  cut  off  from  the  unity 
of  the   Body  of  Christ.     And,  moreover,  we  do  declare   her  to  be 
deprived  of  her  pretended  title  to  the   kingdom  aforesaid,  and  of  all 
dominion,  dignity,  and  privilege  whatsoever  ;  and  also,  the  nobility, 
subjiets,  and  people  of  said  kingdom,  and  all  others  who  have  in  any 
sort  sworn  unto  her,  to   be  forever  absolved  from  any  such  oath,  and 
all  manner  of  duty,  of  dominion,  allegiance  and  obedience;  and  we 
also  do,  by  authority  of  these  presents,  absolve  them,  and  do  deprive 
the  said  Elizabeth  of  her  pretended  title  to  the  kingdom,  and  all  other 
things   before  named.      And  we   do  command   and   charge  all  and 
every  the  noblemen,  subjects,  people,  and  others  aforesaid,  that  they 
presume  not  to  obey  her,  or  her   orders,  mandates  and  laws  ;  and 
those  which  shall  do  the  contrary,  we  do  include   them   in   the   like 
sentence  of  anathema.     And  because  it  would  be  a  difficult  matter 
to  convey  these  presents  to  all  places  wheresoever  it  shall  be  need- 
ful :  our  will  is,  that  the  copies  thereof,  under  a  public  notary's  hand, 
and  sealed  with  the  seal  of  an  ecclesiastical  prelate,  or  of  his  court, 
shall  carry  altogether  the  same  credit   with  all  men,  judicially  and 


99 

extrajudicially,  as  these  presents  should  do  if  they  were  exhibited  or 

showed. 

"  Given  at  Rome,  at  St.  Peter's,  in  the  year  of  the  Incarnation 
of  our  Lord,  one  thousand  five  hundred  and  sixty-nine,  the 
fifth  of  the  calends  of  March,  and  of  our  Popedom  the 
fifth  year.  C^,  Glorikrius. 


h.—Page  20. 

It  is  well  known  that  a  number  of  Romish  priests  were  put  to 
death  under  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  :  the  pretence  of  the  Romanists 
is,  that  they  suffered  for  conscience  ;  and  there  is  a  book  entitled 
"  Missionary  Priests,"  intended  to  glorify  them  as  a  part  of  the 
noble  army  of  martyrs  who  have  fallen  as  victims  to  the  rage  of 
heathen  persecution.  The  fact  is,  however,  that  these  poor  creatures 
were  executed  for  treason,  for  exciting  seditions  in  the  state,  and  for 
plotting  the  deposition  and  death  of  the  queen,  under  the  authority 
and  direction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  For  proof  of  this,  see  the 
trial  of  Garnet  and  others  of  the  same  stamp,  in  the  State  Trials. 

"  The  execution  of  justice  in  England,  not  for  religion  but  for 
treason,"  is  the  title  of  a  paper  which  was  prepared  and  published 
under  the  direction  of  Burleigh,  secretary  to  Queen  Elizabeth,  and 
may,  therefore,  be  regarded  as  authority  for  the  transactions  of  that 
reign.  The  occasion  of  its  publication  was  to  disabuse  foreign 
princes  and  states  of  the  false  impression  which  they  had  received 
from  certain  persons,  who,  according  to  their  own  story,  had  been 
compelled  to  leave  their  native  England  and  Ireland,  on  account 
of  their  attachment  to  the  religion  of  Rome,  and  their  maintenance 
of  the  Pope's  authority  ;  and  its  purpose  is  to  show  the  true  charac- 
ter of  these  men,  and  the  utter  falsehood  of  their  representations. 
In  this  paper,  Burleigh  refers  to  many  of  the  bishops  of  Queen 
Mary's  time,  then  living,  and  to  great  numbers  both  of  clergymen 
and  laymen  known  to  adhere  to  the  Roman  religion,  and  to  the 
Pope's  supremacy  as  of  Divine  right,  who  had  never  been  molested 
by  the  State.  "  And  if,  then,"  he  proceeds,  "  it  be  inquired  for 
what  cause  these  others  have  of  late  suffered  death,  it  is  truly  to  be 
answered,  that  none  at  all  are  impeached  for  treason,  to  the  danger 
of  their  life,  but  such  as  do  obstinately  maintain  the  contents  of  the 
Pope's  Bull  aforementioned,  which  do  import  that  her  majesty  is 


100 

not  the  lawful  Queen  of  England — the  first  and  highest  point  of 
treason  ;  and  that  all  her  subjects  are  discharged  of  their  oaths 
of  obedience — another  high  point  of  treason  ;  and  all  warranted  to 
disobey  her  and  her  laws — a  third  and  a  very  large  point  of  treason." 

The  same  document  having  referred  to  the  notorious  evil  lives 
•of  some  who  had  been  plotting  against  the  Government,  adds:  "It 
liked  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  in  favor  of  their  treasons,  not  to 
color  their  offences  as  themselves  openly  pretended  to  do,  for  avoid* 
ing  of  common  shame  of  the  world,  but  flatly  to  animate  them  to 
•continue  their  former  evil  purposes,  that  is,  to  take  arms  against 
their  lawful  queen — to  invade  her  realm  with  foreign  forces — to  pur- 
sue all  her  good  subjects,  and  their  native  countries,  with  fire  and 
sword,"  etc. ;  and  these,  it  continues,  "  thus  acting  under  the  banner 
of  Rome,  *  *  have  justly  suffered  death,  not  by  force  of  any  new 
laws  established  either  for  religion  or  against  the  Pope's  supremacy, 
as  the  slanderous  libellers  would  have  it  seem  to  be,  but  by  the 
ancient  temporal  laws  of  the  realm,  namely,  by  the  laws  of  Par- 
liament, made  in  King  Edward  lll.'s  time,  about  the  year  of  our 
Lord,  1330,  which  is  above  two  hundred  years  and  more  past,  when 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  and  Popes  were  suffered  to  have  their  authority 
ecclesiastical  in  this  realm,  as  they  had  in  many  other  countries." 

This  paper  of  Burleigh  furnishes  documentary  proof  of  a  fact  (of 
which,  indeed,  sufficient  evidence  of  another  kind  may  be  had  else- 
where) which  may  in  this  connexion  be  submitted  to  the  atten- 
tion and  judgment  of  the  reader. 

The  case  w^as  this :  The  Bull  commanded  the  subjects  of  the 
•queen  not  to  obey  her;  and  she  being  excommunicated,  all  that 
did  obey  fell  under  the  same  anathema  with  herself.  Here  then 
was  a  strait :  if  the  Romanists  obeyed  the  queen,  they  incurred  the 
Pope's  curse  ;  if  they  disobeyed  her,  they  were  in  danger  of  the  laws 
of  their  country.  What,  then,  were  they  to  dol  What  they  did  do 
was  this  :  they  brought  the  case  to  the  notice  of  the  Roman  see^ 
and  requested  that,  until  the  time  should  come  when  the  Bull  could 
be  publicly  executed,  it  should  be  so  understood  as  to  bind  the 
■queen  and  the  heretics,  but  not  to  bind  the  Romanists  ;  so  that  the 
latter  might,  with  a  good  conscience,  avail  themselves  of  the  protec- 
tion of  the  laws,  for  the  purpose  of  attempting  to  subvert  them,  and 
until  their  attempts  should  succeed.  So  careful  were  they  to  strain 
out  the  gnat  of  disobedience  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  while  they 
swallowed  the  poison  of  treason  to  their  country.  And  here  is  the 
sanction  of  their  conduct  by  the  Church  of  Rome  : 


101 

"  Faculiafes  Concessce,  pp.  Roberto  Parsonio  et  Edmundo  Camjnano, 
pro  Anglia,  die  14  Aprilis,  1580. 

"  Petatur  a  summo  Domino  nostro,  explicatio  Bullse  declaratoriae 
per  Pium  Quintuin  contra  Elizabetham  &  ei  adherentes,  quani 
Catholici  cupiunt  intelligi  hoc  modo,  ut  obliget  semper  ilium  & 
hcereticos,  Catholicos  vera  nuUo  modo  obliget,  rebus  sic  stantibus, 
sed  tum  demum.  quando  publica  ejusdem  BuUaj  executio  fieri  pote- 
nt." Then  followed  many  other  petitions  of  faculties  for  their  fur- 
ther authorities,  which  are  not  needful  for  this  purpose  to  be  recited. 
But  in  the  end  followeth  this  sentence,  as  an  answer  of  the  Pope's : 
"Has  prtedictas  gratias  concessit  Summus  Pontifex  patri  Koberto 
Parsonio  &  Edmundo  Campiano  in  Angliam  profecturis,  die  14 
Aprilis,  1580.     Prajsente  patre  Oliverio  Manarco  assistente." 

The  English  of  which  Latin  sentences  is  as  followeth  : 
''  Faculties  granted  to  the  two  Fathers,  Robert  Parsons  and  Edmund 
Campian,  for  England,  the  lith  of  April,  1580. 

"  Let  it  be  asked  or  required  of  our  most  holy  Lord,  the  explica- 
tion or  meaning  of  the  Bull  declaratory  made  by  Pius  the  Fifth 
against  Elizabeth,  and  such  as  do  adhere  to  or  obey  her;  which  Bull 
the  Catholicks  desire  to  be  understood  in  this  manner,  that  the  same 
Bull  shall  always  bind  her  and  the  hereticks,  but  the  Catholicks  it 
shall  by  no  means  bind,  as  matters  or  things  do  now  stand  or  be, 
but  hereafter,  when  the  publick  execution  of  that  Bull  may  be  had 
or  made." 

Then,  in  the  end,  the  conclusion  was  thus  added  : 

"The  highest  pontiff  or  bishop  granted  these  foresaid  graces  to 
Fathers  Robert  Parsons  and  Edmund  Campian,  who  are  now  to  take 
their  journeys  into  England,  the  fourteenth  day  of  April,  in  the  year 
of  our  Lord  1580,  being  present  the  Father  Oliverius  Manarke, 
Assistant." 

I  learn  from  one  of  the  writers  in  Gibson,  that  this  paper  of  Bur- 
leigh received  an  answer  at  the  time;  and  as  the  answer  was  written 
by  a  Cardinal,  and  ought  to  carry  some  weight,  the  reader  may  not 
be  displeased  to  see  the  account  of  it  given  by  the  author  referred 
to :  "  Cardinal  Allen,"  he  says,  "  in  his  Answer  to  the  Treatise  of 
the  Lord  Treasurer,  entitled,  'The  Execution  of  Justice  in  England,' 
though  he  confesses  the  matter-of-fact,  as  it  hath  been  above  related, 
yet  positively  asserts  that  Campian  and  the  rest  of  the  priests,  the 
earls  of  Northumberland  and  Westmoreland,  and  all  that  had  suf- 
fered for  putting  the  Bull  of  Pius  V.  in  execution,  were  martyrs, 
chap.  I  and  2;  that  the  priests  and  Catholick  brethren  had  behaved 
themselves  discreetly,  and  nothing  seditiously,  in  their  several  an- 
swers to  the  articles  proposed  to  them  concerning  that  Bull,  cap.  3 
and  4 ;  that  it  is  a  part  of  Catholick  doctrine,  that  heretical  princes, 


102 

being  excommunicated  by  the  Pope,  are  to  be  deprived,  and  that 
their  subjects  are  thereupon  absolved  from  their  allegiance  ;  and  that 
princes,  being  thus  deposed,  their  subjects  may  take  up  arms  against 
them  for  heresy,  or  for  any  other  cause  for  which  the  Pope  shall 
declare  that  they  deserve  deprivation,  cap.  5  and  6  ;  that  such  wars 
for  religion  are  not  only  just,  but  honorable  ;  and  endeavors  to  prove 
those  his  assertions  of  the  Pope's  power  and  superiority  over  kings, 
in  case  of  heresy,  apostacy,  or  other  like,  to  be  agreeable  to  God's 
Word,  and  not  treasonable  nor  undutiful  to  any  prince  or  State  in 
the  world,  p.  77.  He  vindicates  the  authority  of  the  Lateran  Canons, 
etc.,  and  brings  several  instances  from  Gregory  VII.  downwards,  of 
princes  deprived,  as  he  contends,  justly,  particularly  King  John  and 
King  Henry  II,,  cap.  6  and  7.  He  threatens,  p.  181,  etc.,  utter  ruin 
to  the  queen  and  her  adherents,  from  the  Pope  and  Catholick  princes 
confederate  against  her,  unless  they  returned  to  the  unity  of  the 
See  Apostolick,  or  granted  the  Roman  Catholics  a  toleration,  cap.  8 
and  9.'  And  in  the  conclusion.  If  the  Roman  Catholicks  would  do  us 
the  favor  to  reprint  this  book  (for  now  it  is  very  rarely  to  be  met 
with),  all  that  read  it  might  there  plainly  enough  find  the  reasons 
why  the  penal  laws  against  them  were  then,  as  they  are  now, 
thought  so  unjust  and  cruel  by  that  party,  and  how  much  their  argu- 
ments and  pretences  for  toleration,  in  some  late  treatises,  are  differ- 
ent from  those  they  made  use  of  in  that  age,  as  if  they  had  altered 
their  principles  as  to  the  deposing  power  and  extirpation  of  all 
hereticks  and  rebels  to  the  Apostolick  See,  which  this  Cardinal,  and 
the  rest  of  our  English  seminary  priests,  in  those  days,  maintained 
not  only  to  be  lawful,  but  decreed  in  several  General  Councils  as 
articles  of  faith." 

It  is  but  fair  to  add,  that  these  principles  were  not  embraced  by 
all  the  Romanists  of  that  day.  Indeed,  the  secular  priests  and  the 
Jesuits  had  a  sort  of  family  quarrel  (Camden,  who  personally  knew 
many  of  them,  hints  his  belief  that  the  quarrel  was  a  sham,  and  that 
the  parties  were  at  heart  agreed),  in  the  course  of  which  the  former 
berate  the  latter  roundly  for  their  dishonest  and  treasonable  prac- 
tices, and  profess  their  affection  for  the  queen,  and  their  gratitude 
for  the  kind  treatment  they  had  received  from  her  government. 

These  notes  are  running  to  an  inordinate  length ;  but  having  exhibited 
at  some  length  the  conduct  of  the  one  party  of  these  distracted  schis- 
matics, it  seems  but  fair  to  give  a  taste  of  the  wholesome  correction 
which  they  received  from  the  other.  This  was  administered  in  a 
paper  entitled,  "  Important  Considerations,  which  ought  to  move  all 


103 

true  and  sound  Catholicks,  who  are  not  wholly  jesuited,  to  acknow- 
ledge, without  all  equivocations,  ambiguities  or  shiftings,  that  the 
proceedings  of  her  majesty,  and  of  the  State  with  them,  since  the 
beginning  of  her  highness's  reign,  have  been  both  mild  and  merciful. 
Published  by  sundry  of  us,  the  secular  priests,  in  dislike  of  many 
treatises,  letters,  and  reports  which  have  been  written  and  made  in 
divers  places  to  the  contrary,  together  with  our  opinion,"  etc.  This 
brochure,  which  is  addressed  to  "  Right  honorable,  worshipful,  well- 
beloved  lords,  ladies,  earls,  countesses,  viscounts,  viscountesses, 
barons,  baronesses,  batchelors,  virgins,  married,  single,"  is  a  tumid 
affair.  I  will  quote  but  one  passage,  and  it  shall  be  from  the  j?ero- 
ration  :  "That,  therefore,  you  shall  not  have  cause  to  curse  us,  nor 
your  innocent  blood  to  cry  against  us,  together  with  the  Jesuites  that 
have  already  brought  you  into  a  fool's  paradise  of  zealous  aspires, 
nor  your  posterity  bewail  our  silence,  whiles  any  English  blood 
remains  alive  ;  this  is  the  cause  of  our  breach,  and  herein  have  we, 
do  we,  and  will  we  be  disobedient  to  death.  Never  shall  our 
adversaries  be  able  to  upbraid  us,  or  stain  our  priestly  function  and 
Catholick  profession  with  a  Calvinian,  or  a  Buchananian,  or  Cart- 
wrightian,  or  a  huff-muff  Puritanian  popularity,  which  is  the  only 
mark  the  Jesuites  aim  at.  Never  shall  her  majesty  nor  the  State 
suspect  us  for  any  bill  exhibited  by  us  or  our  means,  in  her  High 
Court  of  Parliament,  for  any  alteration  and  change  of  the  ancient 
laws  and  customs,  which  both  Puritans  and  Jesuites  do  greedily 
gape  after  and  labor  for.  Never  shall  any  prince,  people,  or  nation, 
point  at  us  for  traitors,  unnatural,  disloyal,  false-hearted,  unkind, 
ungrateful  Englishmen ;  laugh  us  to  scorn,  and  worthily  reject  us, 
after  they  had  the  sack  and  spoil  of  our  country  by  our  means. 
Never  shall  all  the  drifts,  plots  and  devices  the  Jesuites,  or  yet  the 
devil  himself  can  invent,  bring  us  to  be  in  the  predicament  of 
treason,  treachery,  ambitious  aspires  and  conspiracies  with  them. 
Never  shall  the  Catholick  Church  or  commonwealth  of  England  find 
so  wicked  a  member  as  a  Wolsey,  a  Parsons,  a  Creswell,  a  Garnet, 
a  Black  well,  among  those  whom  you  (dear  Catholicks)  account  of  as 
reprobates,  malecon tents,  atheists,  and  of  God  forsaken.  Never 
shall  the  child  of  any  peer,  noble,  or  lord,  of  or  in  this  land,  say,  a 
secular  priest  (termed  indiscreetly  by  you,  dear  Catholics,  one  of  the 
faction)  was  cause  of  my  ruin,  and  overthrow  of  my  honorable 
father,  house,  blood  and  name;  which  may  be  said,  and  will  be 
proved,  by  sundry  examples  against  the  Puritans  and  Jesuites,  as 
well  conjunct  as  apart.  Never  shall  any  royal  lady  of  the  court, 
maid  of  honor,  or  damsel  of  rare  aspect,"  etc. 


104 

But  ill  what  light  was  this  party  of  the  schismatics  regarded  by 
the  see  of  Rome,  the  approbation  of  which  was  the  great  object  of 
their  "  aspires  "?"  They  could  not  hope  for  much  if  the  Jesuits  were 
in  favor,  and  they  got  less  than  they  hoped  for,  if  we  may  lake  the 
word  of  Widdrington,  one  of  their  side  and  a  contemporary,  who  (as 
quoted  in  the  Jesuites  Behaviour,  p,  156,  Gibson's  Preservative,  vol. 
3)  relates  :  "  That  Queen  Elizabeth  having  discovered  that  she  was 
minded  to  show  favor  to  as  many  Roman  Catholick  priests  as  should 
give  her  assurance  of  their  loyalty,  and  to  exempt  them  from  suffer- 
ing the  penalties  of  her  laws,  some  well-meaning  men  went  to  Rome 
to  carry  the  good  news,  as  they  thought  it ;  but  when  they  were 
come  thither,  they  found  themselves  much  mistaken :  instead  of 
thanks,  they  were  reproached  by  the  governing  party,  and  branded 
with  the  name  of  schismaticks,  spies  and  rebels  to  the  See  Apos- 
tolick ;  and,  moreover,  there  was  one  of  that  party  compiled  a 
treatise  in  Italian,  to  advise  his  Holiness  that  it  was  not  good  and 
profitable  to  the  Catholick  cause,  that  any  liberty  or  toleration 
should  be  granted  by  the  State  of  England  to  Catholicks." 


M.—Fage  22. 

Take  for  instance  the  story  of  the  Assumption  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
which,  as  collected  by  Bishop  Hickes  out  of  the  offices  of  the  Roman 
Church,  is  in  brief  this  :  When  the  Virgin  died,  all  the  apostles, 
wherever  dispersed,  were  suddenly  caught  up  in  the  air  and  brought  to 
Jerusalem.  When  there  assembled,  a  vision  of  angels  appeared  unto 
them,  and  the  vision  was  attended  with  the  sweet  psalmody  of  the 
heavenly  powers;  in  which  the  Blessed  Virgin  resigned  her  soul  in  a 
glorious  manner  into  the  hands  of  God,  and  the  angels  and  apostles 
continuing  to  sing  together,  her  body  was  carried  out  and  put  in  a 
coffin,  and  buried  at  Gethsemane,  where  the  angels  continued  to  sing 
three  days  together.  At  the  end  of  three  days,  Thomas,  who  was 
not  with  the  apostles  when  she  died,  came  to  Jerusalem,  and  being 
desirous  to  worship  the  body  of  the  Blessed  Virgin,  they  went  to 
Gethsemane  to  take  it  up ;  but  when  they  had  opened  the  grave,  and 
the  coffin,  to  their  great  astonishment  there  was  no  body  there  ;  and 
they  all  agreed  in  this  opinion,  that  it  had  pleased  the  Wokd  of  God 
and  the  Lord  of  Glory,  who  took  his  body  out  of  the  Blessed  Virgin, 
not  to  suffer  her  to  see  corruption  ;  but  to  do  her  the  honor  to  trans- 
late it  into  heaven,  before  the  common  and  universal  resurrection. 


105 

An  annual  feast,  called  the  Feast  of  the  Assumption,  is  celebrated 
ill  the  Roman  Church,  on  the  15th  of  August,  in  commemoration  of 
this  fabulous  occurrence  ;  which  feast,  and  the  offices  relating  to  it,  were 
abolished  by  our  Reformers.  It  is  from  the  office  for  the  Assumption 
in  the  Roman  Breviary  that  the  above  account  is  compiled,  and  who- 
ever will  be  at  the  pains  to  verify  it,  will  see  that  it  is  not  exaggerated, 
but  the  reverse. 

If  the  authorities  of  the  Roman  Church  really  believe  with  the 
old  mystics  and  modern  infidels,  that  the  story  of  our  Blessed  Lord 
is  a  myth  contrived  for  the  edification  of  the  people,  but  devoid  of 
historic  truth,  why  do  they  not  honestly  say  sol  But  if  they  believe 
in  the  literal  truth  of  the  gospel,  why  do  they  retain  this  transparent 
fable  in  the  offices  of  their  Church  1  For  consistency's  sake,  they 
should  either  declare  our  Lord's  Ascension  a  flible,  or  else  abolish 
the  Feast  of  the  Assumption, 

"  I  cannot  but  observe  here,"  says  Bishop  Ilickes,  {Specuhim  B. 
Virginis.p.  88.)  after  having  given  the  particulars  of  this  myth  about 
the  Virgin  Mary,  "  how  well  the  story  of  her  Assumption  is  framed 
to  answer  to  our  Lord's  Ascension,  and  how  Thomas  was  absent  at 
this  meeting  of  the  apostles,  just  as  he  w^as  at  that  in  which  Jesus 
stood  in  the  midst  of  them,  and  shewed  unto  them  his  hands  and  his 
side.  Poor,  unfortunate  apostle !  thou  art  always  tardy,  and  canst 
never  come  in  time  to  meet  the  rest  of  thy  brethren.  But  perhaps 
he  was  at  the  Indies,  and  had  a  greater  journey  than  the  rest,  who 
were  nearer  to  Jerusalem.  I  am  as  content  as  any  man  to  admit 
this  excuse;  and  if  you  further  desire  to  know  what  death  the  Blessed 
Virgin  died  of,  the  author  of  the  Contemplations  will  tell  you  that 
she  died  of  a  spiritual  fever,  into  which  she  fell  through  a  seraphick 
vehemency  of  Divine  love,  which  inflamed  her  blood,  and  set  her 
sacred  heart  on  fire;  and  that  her  assumption  was  in  this  manner: 
Her  glorious  soul,  saith  he,  descended  from  her  imperial  seat  in 
heaven,  accompanied  with  seraphims  and  chiefest  saints,  and  re-assun\ed 
her  sacred  body,  and  ascended  with  it  again,  and  placed  it  above  all 
the  troops  of  the  blessed.  Being  ascended  in  body  and  soul  into 
heaven,  she  was  seated  on  a  throne  above  all  seraphims,  next  to  the 
most  glorious  Trinity,  and  inaugurated,  proclaimed  and  acknowledged 
queen  of  all  pure  creatures,  and  at  her  coronation  she  was  clothed 
with  the  sun,  and  had  the  moon  for  her  foot-stool,  and  was  crowned 
with  an  imperial  crown  of  twelve  stars.  And  truly,  in  some  of  her 
offices,  the  1st  verse  of  the  12th  chapter  of  the  Revelations  is  applied  to 


106 

her,  where  it  is  written,  'And  there  appeared  a  great  wonder  in 
heaven,  a  woman  clothed  with  the  sun,  and  the  moon  under  her  feet, 
and  upon  her  head  a  crown  of  twelve  stars.'  " 


[Owing  to  the  cancelling  of  a  note  and  a  consequent  change  in  the  lettering, 
the  following  note  was  accidentally  overlooked,  and  a  mistake  made  in  one  of  the 
references.  The  note  relates  to  a  passage  on  p.  26,  (where  the  reference  is  erro- 
neously made  to  be  "  D.")  and  is  here  inserted  in  its  proper  place.] 

Mm.— Po^e  26. 

As  intimated  in  the  text,  the  title  "  Head  of  the  Church"  was  ac- 
corded to  the  first  king  of  England  who  assumed  it,  by  his  Roman 
Catholic  bishops ;  to  which  may  be  added,  that  the  title,  after  being 
sanctioned  by  Romanists,  was,  on  the  completion  of  the  Reformation) 
laid  aside  by  Protestants,  because,  from  a  feeling  of  reverence,  they 
would  not  apply  to  an  earthly  potentate  the  appellation  which  is  com- 
monly given,  though  in  a  totally  different  sense,  to  our  Saviour.     The 
title  was  first  assumed  by  Henry  VIII.,  and  retained  by  Edward  VI., 
and  by  Queen  Mary  also,  during  part  of  her  reign ;  the  very  act 
which  was  passed  in  the  first  year  of  her  reign  to  restore  Popery, 
(entitled  "  An  Acte  for  the  Repeale  of  certayne  Statutes  made  in  the 
time  of  the  Ralgne  of  Kinge  Edwarde  the  Syxthe,")  styling  the 
queen  "  The  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England  and  Ireland." 
The  title,  however,   (by  which  no  more  was  meant  than  a  civil  or 
political  headship,  such  as  that  of  Saul,  who  is  called  (1  Sam.  xv.  17) 
•'  the  head  of  the  tribes  of  Israel")  was  discontinued  under  Elizabeth, 
and  has  never  since  been  resumed  ;  though,  of  course,  the  thing  in- 
tended by  it  is  retained  as  the  just  prerogative  of  the  crown.    Indeed, 
the  restoration  of  this  power  (which  had  been  usurped  by  the  Bishop 
of  Rome),  was  the  necessary  consequence  of  restraining  appeals  to 
Rome,  of  determining  causes  of  justice  and  disputes  of  law  within 
the  realm,  and  of  reducing  the  ecclesiastics  (then  shielded  by  the 
canon  law)  to  a  just  accountability  to  the  laws  of  the  land.     Of  the 
necessity  of  restoring  this  power  to  the  crown,  there  need  be  no 
further  proof  than  is  afforded  by  the  Bull  of  Paul  III.,  summoning  the 
king  of  England  (Henry  VIII.)  to  appear  within  ninety  days  at  Rome, 
and  stand  to  the  judgment  of  that  Court,  on  his  alleged   delin- 
quencies. 

This  Bull,  which  is  entitled,  "  Damnatio  et  Excommunicatio  Hen- 
rici  VIII.,  Regis  Angliaj,  ejusque  fautorum  &  compllcum,  cum  aliarum. 


107 

poenarum  adjectione,"  may  be  seen  in  full  in  Burnet's  Collection  of 
Records,  vol  i.,  p.  166.  After  some  preliminary  matters,  it  sets 
forth  that  Henry  was  not  ashamed  to  publish  and  compel  his  subjects 
to  hold  certain  laws  and  general  constitutions,  among  which  was  this, 
"  Quod  Romanus  Pontifex  caput  Ecclesiaj  &  Christi  Vicarius  non 
erat,  &  quod  ipse  in  Anglica  Ecclesia  supremum  caput  existebat :" 
That  the  Roman  Pontiff  was  not  the  head  of  the  Church  and  Vicar  of 
Christ,  and  that  he  himself  was  the  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  in 
England.  (See  Appendix  D.)  For  the  rest,  suffice  it  to  give  the 
Synopsis  of  Collier,  vol  ii.,  p.  98.,  of  the  folio  edition. 

In  this  instrument  "  he  gives  Bishop  Fisher  a  great  character,  and 
styles  him  a  cardinal.  He  admonishes  the  king  to  relinquish  his 
errors,  and  repent  his  crimes,  summons  his  highness  to  ap|)ear  with- 
in ninety  days  at  Rome,  either  in  jjijrson  or  by  proxy,  and  stand  to 
the  judgment  of  that  court.  And  in  case  of  refusal,  he  was,  after  the 
term  prefixed,  to  be  excommunicated,  and  the  kingdom  put  under  an 
interdict.  And,  upon  non-performance  of  the  conditions  above 
mentioned,  the  subjects  are  commanded  to  withdraw  their  allegiance  ; 
all  other  Christian  countries  are  forbidden  the  liberties  of  intercourse 
and  commerce  with  the  English;  the  ecclesiastics  are  ordered  to 
depart  the  kingdom  with  all  expedition;  the  temporal  nobility  and 
gentry  to  form  themselves  into  an  army,  and  drive  the  king  out  of 
his  dominions.  And  as  for  foreign  kings  and  princes,  they  are 
exhorted  in  the  Lord,  as  Saunders  transcribes  it,  to  treat  Henry  and 
his  abettors,  as  rebels  to  the  Church,  and  undertake  a  Holy  War 
against  them,  till  they  have  brought  them  to  recollection  and  submis- 
sion to  the  Apostolic  See  ;  and,  to  disentangle  their  consciences  and 
encourage  them  the  better,  all  their  alliances,  treaties  and  engage- 
ments, of  what  kind  soever,  with  the  king  of  England,  are  declared 
null  and  void. 

"  And  for  the  more  effectual  apprehending  of  those  who  stood  firm 
for  the  king,  his  Holiness  grants  Letters  of  Reprisal  to  Christendom 
in  general :  and  thus  any  body  that  could  seize  'em.  might  make 
slaves  of  their  persons,  and  take  their  effects  for  their  own  use. 

"  Farther,  there's  an  order  directed  to  all  the  prelates,  to  excom- 
municate the  king  and  his  abettors  publicly  in  their  churches.  And 
lastly,  all  persons  are  laid  under  the  like  censure  that  shall  hinder  this 
Bull  from  being  either  published  or  executed.  And  that  the  king 
and  his  friends  might  not  pretend  themselves  unacquainted  with  the 
Pope's  resolution,  this  instrument  was  order'd  to  be  fixed  on  the 
doors  of  the  principal  churches  of  Tournay,  Bruges,  and  Dunkirk." 

"Was  it  not  high  time  for  the  king  to  take  care  of  himself,  and 
proclaim  himself  the  head  of  all  matters  in  his  own  dominions'?  As 
Romanists,  however,  are  accustomed  to  assert  that  the  kings  of  Eng- 
land, since  the  rejection  of  popery,  have  claimed  that  power  of  juris- 


108 

diction  which  Christ  left  to  the  Church,  I  annex  one  of  the  injunctions 
of  Elizabeth,  A.D.  1559,  the  37th  Article  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  the  corresponding  article  as  it  stands  appended  to  our  American 
Prayer  Book.  On  a  comparison  of  them,  it  will  be  seen  that  they 
are  intended  merely  to  assert  the  supremacy  of  the  law  of  the  land, 
in  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States,  over  all  classes  of  men,  ec- 
clesiastical and  secular,  in  opposition  to  the  civil  and  political  power, 
in  these  countries,  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome. 

An  Admonition  to  Simiyle  Men  deceived  by  Malicious. 

The  queen's  majesty  being  informed,  that  in  certain  places  of  the 
realm,  sundry  of  her  native  subjects  being  called  to  ecclesiastical 
ministry  of  the  Church,  be  by  sinister  persuasion  and  perverse  con- 
struction, induced  to  find  some  scruple  in  the  form  of  an  oath,  which, 
by  an  act  of  the  last  Pariiament,,^s  prescribed  to  be  required  of  divers 
persons  for  their  recognition  of  their  allegiance  to  her  majesty,  which 
certainly  never  was  ever  meant,  nor  by  any  equity  of  words  or  good 
sense  can  be  thereof  gathered :  would  that  all  her  loving  subjects 
should  understand,  that  nothing  was,  is,  or  shall  be  meant  or  intended 
by  the  same  oath,  to  have  any  other  duty,  allegiance,  or  bond,  re- 
quired by  the  same  oath,  than  was  acknowledged  to  be  due  to  the  most 
noble  kings  of  famous  memory,  king  Henry  the  Eighth,  her  majestie's 
father,  or  king  Edward  the  Sixth,  her  Majestie's  brother. 

And  further,  her  majesty  forbiddeth  all  manner  of  her  subjects  to 
give  ear  or  credit  to  such  perverse  and  malicious  persons,  which  most 
sinisterly  and  maliciously  labor  to  notifie  to  her  loving  subjects,  how 
by  words  of  the  said  oath  it  may  be  collected,  that  the  kings  or 
queens  of  this  realm,  possessors  of  the  crown,  may  challenge  autho- 
rity and  power  of  ministry  of  Divine  service  in  the  Church,  whereia 
her  said  subjects  be  much  abused  by  such  evil  disposed  persons. 
For  certainly  her  majesty  neither  doth  nor  ever  will  challenge  any 
authority,  than  that  has  been  challenged  and  lately  used  by  the  said 
noble  kings  of  famous  memory,  king  Henry  the  Eighth,  and  king 
Edward  the  Sixth,  which  is,  and  was  of  ancient  time  due  to  the 
Imperial  Crown  of  this  realm,  that  is,  under  God,  to  have  the 
sovereignty  and  rule  over  all  manner  of  persons  born  within  these  her 
realms,  dominions  and  countries,  of  what  estate,  either  ecclesias- 
tical or  temporal  soever  they  be,  so  as  no  other  sovereign  power 
shall  or  ought  to  have  any  superiority  over  them.  And  if  any  person 
that  hath  conceived  any  other  sense  of  the  form  of  the  said  oath,  shall 
accept  the  same  oath  with  this  interpretation,  sense,  or  meaning,  her 
majesty  is  well  pleased  to  accept  every  such  in  that  behalf,  as  her 
good  and  obedient  subjects,  and  shall  acquit  them  of  all  manner  of 
penalties  contained  in  the  said  act  against  such  as  shall  peremptorily 
or  obstinately  take  the  same  oath. 


109 

From  the  37 /A  Article  of  the  Church  of  England,  entitled,  of  "  Civil 

Magistrates.^^ 

The  queen's  majesty  hath  the  chief  power  in  this  realm  of  Eng- 
land, and  other  her  dominions,  unto  whom  the  chief  government  of 
all  estates  of  this  realm,  whether  they  be  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  in 
all  causes  doth  appertain,  and  is  not,  nor  ought  to  be  subject  to  any 
foreign  jurisdiction. 

Where  we  attribute  to  the  queen's  majesty  the  chief  government, 
by  which  titles  we  understand  the  minds  of  some  dangerous  folks  to 
be  offended  :  we  give  not  our  princes  the  ministering  either  of  God's 
Word,  or  of  the  Sacraments,  the  which  thing  the  injunctions  also  set 
forth  by  Elizabeth  our  queen,  do  most  plainly  testifle ;  but  that  only 
prerogative  which  we  see  to  have  been  given  always  to  all  godly 
princes  in  Holy  Scriptures  by  God  himself,  that  is,  that  they  should 
rule  all  estates  and  degrees,  committed  to  their  charge  by  God, 
whether  they  be  ecclesiastical  or  temporal,  and  restrain  with  the 
civil  sword  the  stubborn  and  evil  doers. 

The  same  article,  as  it  stands  annexed  to  our  American  Prayer 
Book,  is  entitled  and  reads  as  follows  : 

Of  the  Power  of  the  Civil  Magistrates. 

"  The  power  of  the  civil  magistrate  extendeth  to  all  men,  as  well 
clergy  as  laity,  in  all  things  temporal;  but  hath  no  authority  in  things 
purely  spiritual.  And  we  hold  it  to  be  the  duty  of  all  men  who  are 
professors  of  the  gospel,  to  pay  respectful  obedience  to  the  civil 
authority,  regularly  and  legitimately  constituted." 


^.—Page  26. 

Reformation,  as  has  been  remarked  by  Dodwell,  (Answer  to  Six 
Queries,  &c.,  London,  A.  D.  1688.)  maybe  considered  two  ways: 
1.  As  preached  and  imposed  under  pain  .of  spiritual  censures,  and  of 
exclusion  from  the  communion  of  the  Church,  and  a  deprivation  of 
all  the  privileges  consequent  on  that  communion  ;  and  this  is  cer- 
tainly the  right  of  the  Church,  and  was  accordingly  practised  by  the 
Church  of  England  on  its  reformation  from  popery.  2,  As  enacted 
as  a  law  of  the  land,  and  consequently  as  urged  the  same  way  as 
other  laws  are  under  temporal  penalties  and  external  coercion  ;  and 
this  is,  undoubtedly,  the  right  of  the  secular  power.  And  this  was 
all  in  which  the  secular  power  concerned  itself  in  the  reformation. 

Of  course  we  are  responsible  only  for  the  action  of  the  Church,  and 
are  not  obliged  to  defend  the  proceedings  of  Parliament.     But  as  the 


no 

cry  of  "  Parliamentary  religion"  is  one  of  the  common  places  of  the 
Romanists,  it  may  be  as  well  to  add,  that  the  reformation  from 
popery  by  Parliament  in  the  16th  century,  proceeded  on  the  same 
principle  as  the  imposition  of  popery  by  Parliament  in  the  previous 
ages.  The  Church  of  England  has  been  no  more  indebted  to  Parlia- 
ment in  its  disbelief  and  rejection  of  popery  since  the  Reformation, 
than  it  was  in  the  belief  and  admission  of  popery  before  the  Reforma- 
tion. The  Church  of  England  first  cast  popery  out  of  the  hearts  of 
therpeople  by  a  pure  gospel,  and  then  the  state  declared  it  cast  out 
by  law. 

If  it  be  said  that  the  magistrate  was  obliged  by  the  law  of  the 
land  and  the  canons  of  the  Church  to  follow  the  advice  of  the  greater 
part  of  the  bishops,  the  answer  is,  that  the  legal  right  of  the  bishops 
to  advise  the  magistrate  might  be  forfeited  by  their  personal  misde- 
meanors, and  of  this  point  the  magistrate  was  the  judge.  And  as  to 
canonical  right,  the  bishops  that  were  deprived  under  Elizabeth  (in 
reference  to  whom  the  objection  is  made)  were  intruders,  who  had 
been  thrust  upon  the  Church  of  England  by  a  foreign  jurisdiction, 
and  were  striving  to  uphold  a  system  of  doctrine  and  usage  which 
the  Church  of  England  had  rejected.  Romanists  themselves  admit, 
that  the  greater  part  of  bishops  in  a  particular  or  national  church,  may 
become  heretical,  and  that  in  such  a  case  the  magistrate  is  not  bound 
to  acknowledge  their  canonical  rights,  or  to  heed  their  censures. 

On  the  subject  of  this, 'and  the  previous  note,  compare  Appendix  D. 


0,—Page  27. 

In  the  ancient  state  of  the  Church,  when  the  main  body  of  Chris- 
tianity was  at  unity  with  itself,  the  word  Catholic,  or  universal,  was 
applied  to  the  common  faith,  and  to  those  Christians  and  Christian 
churches,  wheresoever  dispersed,  which  held  the  common  faith  ;  and 
thus  served  to  distinguish  the  faith  held  in  common  by  the  main  body 
of  Christians,  from  the  errors  of  particular  men,  and  the  main  body 
itself  from  all  particular  divisions  founded  upon  such  errors.  For 
example  :  the  main  body  held  to  one  distinct  and  consistent  faith  in 
the  Holy  Trinity,  and  the  word  Catholic,  or  universal,  was  aptly  used 
to  distinguish  that  fliith  and  the  persons  who  professed  it,  from  the 
Arians,  Macedonians,  Sabellians,   Nestorians,  and  others,  who  either 


Ill 

directly  denied,  or  held  opinions  wlaich,  by  necessary  consequence, 
subverted  it.  The  main  body  held  to  the  doctrine  of  original  sin, 
which  Pelaofius  and  his  followers  denied  ;  hence  the  doctrine  and  its 
followers  were  Catholic,  while  the  opposite  tenet  and  its  followers 
were  Pelagian.  The  main  body  held  to  episcopacy  as  Christ's  insti- 
tution, while  Aerius  rejected  it ;  and  hence  the  former  is  reputed 
Catholic,  while  the  latter  is  known  as  the  heresy  of  Aerius ;  and  so 
in  other  cases. 

But  when  the  main  b6dy  of  Christians  was  divided  into  the 
Churches  of  the  East  and  West,  both  parts  retained  the  name  of 
Catholic,  though  either  part  was  schismatical  and  heretical  in  the 
judgment  of  the  other.  The  Romanists,  indeed,  would  have  us  be- 
lieve that  the  Pope  of  Rome  cut  off  the  Eastern  Christians  from  the 
communion  of  Christ ;  but  the  Eastern  Christians,  who  are  not  behind 
them  in  magniloquence,  are  equally  positive  that  their  Popes  expelled 
the  Western  Pope  from  the  true  Church,  and  affixed  on  him  and  his 
followers  the  brand  of  heresy  and  schism. 

"  Some  time  since,"  to  give  the  reader  their  own  account  of  the 
schism,  "  the  Pope  of  Rome,  being  deceived  by  the  malice  of  the 
devil,  and  foiling  into  strange  novel  doctrines,  revolted  from  the 
miity  of  the  holy  Church,  and  was  cut  off;  and  it  is  now  like  a  shat- 
tered rag  of  a  sail  of  the  spiritual  vessel  of  the  Church,  which  formerly 
consisted  and  was  made  up  of  five  parts,  four  of  which  continue  in 
the  same  state  of  unity  and  agreement :  and  by  these  we  easily  and 
calmly  sail  through  the  ocean  of  this  life,  and  without  difficulty  pass 
over  the  waves  of  heresy,  till  we  arrive  within  the  haven  of  salvation. 
But  he  who  is  the  fifth  part,  being  separated  from  the  entire  sail,  and 
remaining  by  himself  in  a  small  piece  of  the  torn  sheet,  is  unable  to 
perform  his  voyage,  and  therefore  we  behold  him  at  a  distance  tossed 
with  constant  waves  and  tempest,  till  he  return  to  our  Catholic,  Apos- 
tolic, Oriental,  immaculate  faith,  and  be  reinstated  in  the  sail  from 
whence  he  was  broken  oft';  for  this  will  make  him  secure,  and  able 
to  weather  the  spiritual  storms  and  tempests  that  beset  him.  Thus, 
therefure,  the  holy  Church  of  Christ  with  us  subsists  on  four  pillars, 
namely,  the  four  Patriarchs,  and  continues  firm  and  immovable.  The 
first  in  order  is  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  ;  the  second  is  the 
Pope  of  Alexandria  ;  the  third  of  Antioch  ;  the  fourth  of  Jerusalem."* 
With  these  differences,  however,  we  are  not  here  concerned,  but 
only  with  the  fact  that  both  sides  retained  the  name  of  Catholic,  and 

*  See  the  answer  of  the  Eastern  Patriarch  to  the  Nonjuring  Bishops.      Lath- 
bury's  History  of  JNonjurors,  p.  320. 


112 

that  the  word  has  consequently  ceased  to  be  a  note  or  mark  to  dis- 
tinguish those  who  hold  the  common  faith  of  the  ancient  Church  from 
heretics  and  schismatics. 

On  the  state  of  things  prevailing  in  the  ancient  Church  was  founded 
the  direction  of  Cyril:  "  If  you  go  into  any  city,  do  not  inquire  for 
the  Church  and  the  house  of  God  ;  for  the  heretics  say  that  they 
have  the  house  of  God  and  the  Church  ;  but  inquire  for  the  Catholic 
Church,  for  this  truly  is  the  proper  name  fqr  that  holy  Church,  which 
is  the  mother  of  us  all."  Pacian,  also,  another  ancient  writer,  has 
prettily  remarked — "  Christian  is  my  name,  and  Catholic  my  sur- 
name ;  by  the  former  I  am  distinguished  from  infidels,  by  the  latter 
from  heretics  and  schismatics."  Both  these  passages  are  quoted  by 
Bellarmine  (and  often  since  by  other  Romanists)  to  show  that  the 
word  Catholic  is  a  note  of  the  Church,  as  distinguished  from  heretic. 
We  have  seen,  however,  that  in  the  time  in  which  Cyril  and  Pacian 
lived,  the  word  Catholic  was  indeed  a  note  or  mark  to  distinguish 
the  professors  of  the  true  fliith  from  heretics,  but  that  at  present  the 
case  is  otherwise.  For  it  is  notorious  that  Christians  of  the  Eastern 
and  Western  Churches  are  both  called  Catholics,  and  yet  each  believe 
the  other  to  be  involved  in  he.resy  and  schism.  A  Romanist  follow- 
ing the  direction  of  Cyril,  among  the  Orientals,  would  be  directed  to 
a  Church  which  he  would  account  heretical ;  and  without  some  more 
distinctive  appellation  than  the  name  and  surname  assigned  to  him 
by  Pacian,  he  would  inevitably  be  confounded  with  those  who,  in  the 
judgment  of  his  Pope,  are  heretics  and  schismatics. 

"It  was,  therefore,"  says  Field,  (On  the  Church,  book  2,  chap. 
9,)  "more  than  ordinarie  impudencie  in  Bellarmine  to  affirme  that  the 
name  of  a  Catholike  is  a  note  of  true  Catholike  profession,  when  he 
knew  it  to  be  common  to  such  as  himselfe  pronounceth  heretikes.  And 
it  is  yet  more  intolerable  that  he  sayth  there  is  no  heresie  which  re- 
ceiveth  not  her  name  from  some  particular  man,  the  author  and  be- 
ginner of  it :  and  that  whosoever  are  named  after  the  names  of  men 
are  undoubtedly  heretikes.  For  of  what  man  had  the  Apostolici  their 
name,  whose  author  and  first  beginner  was  never  knowen.  (as  Bernard 
sayth)  that  we  might  assure  ourselves  the  divell  was  authour  of  that 
damnable  sect  1  and  who  dare  pronounce  all  the  Thomists,  Scotists, 
Benedictines,  and  the  like,  to  be  heretikes?" 

Every  person  conversant  with  the  writings  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land divines,  knows  that  they  constantly  apply  the  word  Catholic 
to  the  common  and  ancient  fiiith  retained  in  their  liturgy,  and  to 
those  Christian  men  and   Christian  societies  who  have  adhered  to  the 


113 

ancient  faith ;  and  that  they  have  as  constantly  applied  the  word 
Homanist  or  Papist  as  a  note  of  particularity  to  that  schismatical  and 
heretical  faction,  which,  in  the  16th  century,  split  off  from  the  Catholic 
Church  of  England,  and  set  up  separate  congregations  of  their  own. 
This  is  simply  a  fact ;  and  whatever  may  or  may  not  be  inferred  from 
it,  we  must  take  leave  to  adhere  to  the  traditionary  use  received  from 
our  fathers. 

CONVERSATION  BETWEEN  A  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  NOBLEMAN  AND  A 
GENTLEMAN  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 

« <  Qent. — *  -A  *  *  *  It  damns  almost  all  the  papists,  as 
well  as  those  that  are  not  papists.'* 

*  The  author  refers  to  the  BiiUain  Cocna  Domini,  which  is  published  at  Rome 
every  year  on  Maunday-Thursday,  or  the  Thursday  in  the  Passion  Week,  the 
day  on  which  our  Lord  instituted  the  Holy  Eucharist.  Nowhere,  perhaps,  in  the 
same  compass  can  there  be  found  a  more  faithful  expression  of  the  genius  of  the 
Roman  as  distinguished  from  the  Catholic  Church  than  is  exhibited  in  this  Bull ; 
and  nowhere  certainly,  except  in  the  archives  of  Rome,  does  there  exist  such 
another  specimen  of  impudence,  arrogance,  and  (especially  considering  the  time 
chosen  for  its  publication)  impiety  and  blasphemy.  It  is  true,  as  Leslie  says, 
that  it  damns  almost  all  papists  as  well  as  those  that  are  not  papists  ;  an  incon- 
gruity which  is  of  no  moment  compared  to  the  advantage  of  keeping  up  a  rule 
ready  to  be  put  in  practice  when  the  fitting  time  shall  come. 

The  first  section  of  this  Bull  damns  not  only  all  persons  who  live  out  of  the 
Roman  communion,  and  all  their  adherents,  receivers,  favorers  and  defenders, 
but  also  all  who  without  the  Pope's  permission,  "  knowingly  read,  keep,  print, 
or  any  ways,  for  any  cause  whatsoever,  publicly  or  privately,  on  any  pretext  or 
color,  defend,  those  books  containing  heresy  or  treating  of  religion." 

The  second  section  damns  all  and  singular  of  whatsoever  station  or  degree, 
and  puts  an  interdict  on  all  universities  and  colleges,  who  appeal  from  the  orders 
or  decrees  of  the  Pope,  for  the  time  being,  to  a  future  general  council,  together 
with  all  who  aid  and  favor  the  appeal. 

The  seventh  section  damns  all  those  who  carry  or  transmit  to  the  Turks,  or  to 
those  who  are  expressly  and  by  name  declared  heretics  by  the  Roman  See,  horses, 
arms,  iron,  iron-wire,  tin,  steel,  and  all  kind  of  metals  and  warlike  instruments, 
timber,  hemp,  rope,  &c.,  and  other  things  of  this  nature  which  they  may  make 
use  of  to  the  prejudice  of  Christians  and  Catholics. 

The  eighth  damns  all  persons,  "  even  though  they  be  bishops  or  kings," 
hindering  and  invading  those  who  bring  provisions  or  other  necessaries  for  the 
Court  of  Rome. 

The  ninth  damns  all  persons  who  apprehend  or  detain,  by  themselves  or  by 
others,  those  who  come  to  or  return  from  the  Roman  See. 

The  eleventh  damns  all  those  who  apprehend,  imprison  or  detain  Roman  car- 
dinals, bishops,  (fcc,  or  banish  them  from  their  territories. 

8 


114 

"  '  Lord. — We  desire  not  to  be  called  papists ;  we  think  it  a  word 
of  contempt,  as  if  we  were  only  partisans  for  the  Pope,  and  of  that 
party  or  faction  of  Christians  who  would  raise  his  power  above  the 
Church  and  every  thing  else.' 

«'  Qent. — I  am  glad  your  lordship  thinks  so;  and,  indeed,  the 
Church  of  France  (where  you  were  bred)  are  not  papists  in  this  sense; 
they  are  got  free,  in  a  good  measure,  from  the  servitude  of  the  Pope, 
but  they  are  still  Roman  Catholics.' 

"  '  Lord. — We  do  not  delight  in  that  word  neither,  as  if  our  Catho- 
licism were  tied  only  to  Rome ;  we  term  ourselves  Catholics  in 
general,  as  members  of  the  Catholic,  or  Universal  Church.' 

The  thirteenth  damns,  with  all  imaginable  particularity,  all  persons,  ecclesi- 
astic or  secular,  who  shall  presume  to  appeal  from  any  decrees  pronounced  by 
the  Court  of  Rome  or  by  its  sanction  ;  as  also  those  who  any  other  ways  have  re- 
course to  secular  courts  and  the  lay  power,  and  who  cause  such  appeals  to  be 
admitted  by  the  lay  power,  or  who  presume  to  restrain  those  who  would  carry 
their  appeals  to  the  See  of  Rome. 

The  fifteenth  damns  all  persons  who,  under  pretence  of  their  office,  shall  sum- 
mon bef  ire  them  to  their  tribunal,  on  any  pretext  whatever,  ecclesiastical  per- 
sons, against  the  rules  of  the  canon  law 

The  eighteenth  damns  all  those,  even  though  they  be  emperors  or  kings,  presi- 
dents of  kingdoms,  counselors,  senators,  &c.,  who,  without  the  special  and  ex- 
press license  of  the  Pope  of  Rome,  shall  impose  tributes,  and  other  charges  upon 
clergymen,  prelates,  and  other  ecclesiastical  persons,  and  the  goods  and  revenues 
of  churches  and  monasteries. 

The  nineteenth  damns  "all  and  every  magistrates  and  judges,  notaries, 
scribes,  executors,  sub-executors,  any  ways  intruding  themselves  in  capital  or 
criminal  causes  against  ecclesiastical  persons,  by  processing,  banishing,  or  appre- 
hending them,  or  pronouncing  or  executing  any  sentences  against  them,  with- 
out the  special,  particular,  and  express  license  of  this  holy  apostolical  see." 

The  Bull  has  in  all  thirty  sections,  but  let  these  extracts  suffice.  They  who 
can  bring  themselves  to  beUeve  that  this  Bull  is  conceived  in  the  spirit  of  the 
gospel  of  Christ,  and  adapted  to  make  men  loyal  citizens  and  good  Christians, 
will  have  no  occasion  to  distinguish  between  Papists  and  Catholics.  "True  it 
is,"  said  the  Parliament  of  Paris,  A.D.  1687,  speaking  of  this  Bull,  "  that  if  this 
decree  whereby  the  Popes  declare  themselves  sovereign  monarchs  of  the  world, 
be  legitimate,  the  majesty-royal  will  then  depend  on  their  humor,  all  our  liberties 
will  be  abolished,  the  secular  judges  will  no  longer  have  the  power  to  try  the  pos- 
session ofbencfices.nor  the  civil  and  criminal  causes  of  ecclesiastical  persons; 
and  we  shall  quickly  see  ourselves  brought  under  the  yoke  of  the  inquisition." 

It  is  a  sad  illustration  f and  there  are  many  suchj  of  the  boasted  unity  of  the 
Church  of  Rome,  that  while  she  constantly  (once  a  year  in  due  form)  pronounces 
the  above  anathemas,  she  also  constantly  holds  communion  with  many,  e.g.,  the 
French  and  English  Romanists,  who  not  only  practically  disregard  them,  but  do 
not  even  receive  the  Bull  which  contains  them  ;  thus  cutting  off  from  her  com- 
munion those  who  do  not  receive  her  sanctions,  and  at  the  same  time  holding  com- 
munion with  those  she  has  cut  off.  A  Church  thus  inconsistent  with  itself  is  not 
one  ;  and  its  pretended  unity  is  unreal — a  sham. 


115 

"'  Gent. — We  call  ourselves  so  too,  and  in  the  same  sense;  and 
pray  every  day  for  the  Catholic  Church  in  our  Liturgy.  Therefore, 
we  call  not  you  Catholics,  because  it  would  not  distinguish  you  from 
us ;  but  Roman  Catholics  is  calling  a  part  the  whole.' 

"  '  Lord. — You  know  the  meaning  :  not  that  the  particular  Church 
of  Rome  is  all  the  churches  in  the  world,  but  she  is  called  Catholic, 
as  being  the  head  principle  of  unity  and  communion  to  all  other 
churches.' 

" '  Gent. — If  this  be  the  frame  of  this  Catholic  Church,  it  must 
have  been  so  always.' 

^'•'-  Lord. — Yes,  surely,  for  there  was  always  a  Catholic  Church: 
that  is,  some  particular  church  so  called,  in  the  same  sense  as  Rome 
is  now.' 

"  '  Gent. — Pray  then,  my  lord,  tell  me  what  particular  Church  was 
so  called  in  this  sense,  before  there  was  a  Christian  in  Rome  %  And 
how  came  that  Church  to  lose  it  %  And  how  was  it  transferred  to 
Rome  ?  Every  bishop,  every  church,  and  every  member  of  it, 
may  be  called  Catholic,  and  were  so  called,  as  being  included  in  the 
general  notion  of  the  Catholic  Church ;  but  in  the  sense  you  have 
mentioned,  as  head  and  principle  of  unity  to  all  churches,  no  bishop 
or  Church  ever  had  it,  till  taken  up  in  the  latter  times  bv  the  bishop 
and  Church  of  Rome.'  ''—Leslie's  "  Case  Stated,"  A.  DI  1713. 

The  unity  of  the  Divine  Nature  is  the  fundamental  principle  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  and  the  exclusive  assumption  of  the  name  Uni- 
tarian, by  a  particular  denomination,  is  no  proof  of  the  contrary. 
Nobody  in  these  days  connects  convulsive  tremblings  with  the  name 
of  Quaker,  or  a  certain  method  of  devotion  with  that  of  Methodists. 
We  call  two-thirds  of  the  people  on  the  earth  Pagans,  without  sup- 
posing them  to  he  peasants  ;  and  Heathen,  without  doubting  that  the 
nations  are  '  the  Lord's  and  his  Christ's.'  In  like  manner,  we  might 
cheerfully  submit  to  dwarf  down  the  word  Catholic  to  the  Creed  of 
Pius  IV.  and  the  dimensions  of  the  Roman  Church,  without  a  fear 
that  the  name  would  be  taken  for  the  thing,  if  custom,  quern  penes,  etc., 
which  gives  the  law  to  language,  required  it.  But  this  is  the  very 
point  at  which  I  stick.  Such  a  use  of  the  word  is,  in  my  opinion,  not 
only  bad  divinity,  but  bad  English.  It  may  be  good  Italian,  or  good 
Erench,  or  good  Spanish,  or  good  Irish,  and  from  a  convergence  of 
such  influences,  it  may  be  made  (like  many  other  solecisms)  under 
the  Noah  Webster  of  the  next  generation,  good  American ;  but  it 
certainly  is  not,  and  I  hope  never  will  be,  good  English  ;  and  though 
I  would  be  no  more  wanting  in  courtesy  than  was  Busby  in  loyalty, 
yet,  as  he  refused  to  take  off  his  hat  to  majesty  in  the  presence  of 
his  scholars,  so  I  confess  there  are  many  tokens  of  civility  which  I 
should  prefer  to  the  wilful  perpetration  of  bad  English. 


116 

At  the  risk  of  an  abrupt  transition,  though  with  the  certainty  of 
a  good  suggestion  to  the  reader,  I  shall  quote  (and  so  cut  short  this 
note)  a  passage  from  the  able  Analysis  of  Irenseus,  by  Dr.  Beaven, 
the  present  learned  professor  of  divinity  in  Trinity  College,  Toronto  : 
"  It  is  interesting  that  the  self-same  term  which  we  now  use  to  distin- 
guish ourselves  from  separatists,  was  in  use  in  his  age,  [the  age  of 
IrensBus,  who  lived  in  the  second  century,]  namely,  that  of  Church, 
men.  And  that  was  perfectly  natural,  for  the  Church  had  a  name 
from  the  beginning ;  but  its  attribute  of  Catholicism  or  universality, 
as  distinguished  from  the  confined  locality  of  schisms  and  heresies, 
was  not  observed  till  afterwards,  and  therefore  the  name  of  Catholic 
was  posterior  to  that  of  Churchman.''' — Beaven'' s  Irenceus,  p.  210. 


F.—Page  31.. 

This  point  is  so  clearly  and  fully  expressed  by  Archbishop  Synge 
in  his  "  Charitable  Address  to  all  those  who  are  of  the  Communion 
of  the  Church  of  Rome,"  (London,  A.  D.  174G,)  that,  though  the 
passage  is  long,  I  venture  to  quote  it  entire  : 

"  When  a  Jew,  a  Turk,  or  a  Pagan,  or  any  person  who  has  been 
brought  up  in  infidelity,  is  converted  to  the  true  foith,  before  he  is 
received  and  made  a  member  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  it  has  always 
and  everywhere  been  the  practice,  that  at  the  time  of  his  baptism, 
he  should  solemnly  make  a  profession  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  a 
promise  of  Christian  obedience.  The  way  of  doing  this  has  usually 
been,  and  still  continues  to  be,  by  returning  a  proper  answer  to  cer- 
tain questions  which,  for  that  purpose,  are  appointed  to  be  put  to 
him:  and  when  an  infimt  is  brought  by  his  Christian  parents  or 
friends  to  be  baptized,  his  sureties  (whom  we  commonly  call  god- 
fathers and  godmothers)  do,  in  his  name,  make  the  like  answers  to 
the  same  questions,  as  a  security  to  the  Church,  that  the  child  shall 
be  brought  up  in  the  same  faith  and  religion.  If,  therefore,  you 
would  know  what  that  faith  and  religion  is,  into  which  you  have  nil 
been  baptized,  and  thereby  made  members  of  Christ's  Huly  Church, 
and  heirs  of  eternal  salvation,  I  desire  you  would  only  read  the 
office  of  baptism,  as  it  is  set  down  in  the  ritual  of  your  own 
Church,  and  there  you  will  find  what  answers  you,  or  your  sureties 
in  your  name,  were  required  to  make  to  the  questions  then  proposed 
to  you,  which  will  fully  inform  you  what  that  faith  or  religion  is, 
which  your  own  Church  must  allow  to  be  sufficient  in  order  to  eter- 
nal salvation;  because  she  requires  no  more  from  any  man  in  order 
to  his  being  received  as  a  true  member  of  the  Christian  Church,  by 


117 

the  holy  sacrament  of  baptism.  And  because  this  matter  is  a  lit- 
tle more  fully  expressed  in  the  order  of  baptizing  persons  who  are 
of  age,  than  in  that  for  the  baptism  of  infants,  I  shall  from  thence  faith- 
fully translate  all  those  same  questions  and  answers,  and  then  refer 
them  to  your  serious  consideration :  nor  will  I  conceal  anything 
which  is  there  added  for  the  better  understanding  either  the  ques- 
tions which  are  proposed,  or  the  answers  that  are  required  to  be  re- 
turned to  them. 

"  For  example,  then  :  Let  us  now  suppose  that  a  person  from  his 
infancy  brought  up  in  heathen  idolatry,  should  be  so  far  persuaded 
of  the  truth  of  Christianity,  as  to  become  a  convert  to  it,  and  should 
apply  to  a  priest  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  to  the  intent  that  he  might 
be  received  into  the  Church  by  baptism  :  The  Roman  ritual,  pub- 
lished by  the  Pope's  authority  (which,  in  these  cases,  is  allowed  to 
be  the  rule  whereby  every  such  priest  is  to  be  directed) — the  Roman 
ritual,  I  say,  in  the  first  place  orders  (and  that  very  rightly)  that 
such  convert  should  be  diligently  instructed  in  the  Christian  faith, 
and  the  rules  of  holy  living,  and  should,  for  some  days,  be  exercised 
in  works  of  piety  ;  that  his  will  and  purpose  should  often  be  in- 
quired into ;  and  that  he  should  not  be  baptized  without  sufficient 
instructions  and  knowledge,  and  by  his  own  free  will  and  consent. 
And  that  such  his  instruction,  knowledge,  will,  and  consent,  may 
openly  appear,  so  as  to  give  satisfaction  to  the  Church  into  which  he 
is  to  be  received,  that  he  is  a  sincere  convert,  and  a  true  Christian, 
the  priest  is  required,  before  he  baptizes  him,  to  put  the  following 
questions  to  him,  and  the  convert  to  return  such  answers  as  are  sub- 
joined to  the  several  questions : 

"  '  Priest. — By  what  name  art  thou  called  V 

"  '  Co7ivert. — N.' 

"  '  Priest.—^.     What  desirest  thou  of  the  Christian  Church?' 

"  '  Convert. — Faith.' 

"  '  Priest. — What  does  fliith  procure  for  you  V  [Fides  quid  tibi 
praestat.] 

"  '  Convert. — Eternal  life.' 

"  '  Priest. — If  thou  wilt  have  eternal  life,  keep  the  commandments. 
Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all 
thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind,  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.  On 
these  two  commandments  the  whole  law  depends,  and  the  prophets. 
Now,  faith  is,  that  thou  shouldst  worship  one  God  in  Trinity,  and 
the  Trinity  in  unity,  neither  confounding  the  Persons  nor  dividing 
the  substance.  For  there  is  one  Person  of  the  Father,  another  of 
the  Son,  and  another  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  the  substance  of  these 
three  is  one,  and  but  one  Divinity.' 

"  '  Priest. — N.     Dost  thou  renounce  Satan  V 

"  '  Convert. — I  renounce  him.' 

"  '  Priest. — And  all  his  works  V 

"  '  Convert. — I  renounce  them.' 

"  '  Priest. — And  all  his  pomps  V 

"  '  Convert. — I  renounce  them.' 


118 

*' '  Priest. — Dost  thou  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  the 
Creator  of  heaven  and  earth  V 

"  '  Convert. — I  believe.' 

"  '  Priest. — And  dost  thou  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Holy 
Catholic  Church,  the  communion  of  saints,  the  remission  of  sins, 
the  resurrection  of  the  flesh  and  eternal  life  1' 

"  '  Convert. — I  believe.' 

"In  the  order  of  administering  baptism  as  well  to  infants  as  to 
persons  who  are  of  age,  as  it  is  set  down  in  the  Roman  ritual,  there 
are  divers  things  which  are  liable  to  very  just  exceptions,  of  which  I 
here  take  no  notice,  my  only  design  at  present  being  (as  I  have  said), 
to  show  what  that  foith  and  religion  is  into  which  all  members  of 
the  Roman  communion  are  baptized.  But  as  I  pass  along,  I  cannot 
but  observe,  that  when  the  priest  makes  the  sign  of  the  cross  upon 
the  forehead  and  breast  of  such  a  convert  as  1  am  now  speaking  of, 
amongst  other  things  which  he  says  to  him  to  exhort  him  to  a  holy 
life,  he  bids  him  abhor  idols  and  reject  images  (horresce  idola, 
respue  simulacra),  which,  I  think,  is  hardly  to  be  reconciled  -with  the 
practice  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  or  with  the  faith  which  she  pro- 
fesses and  avows,  it  being  expressly  made  an  article  of  faith  in  that 
Church,  that  honor  and  veneration  is  due,  and  to  be  given,  to  the 
images  of  Christ,  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  the  other  saints.  Nor  does  it 
appear  that  the  heathens  themselves  paid  greater  worship  to  their 
images,  than  vyhat  is  maintained  and  practised  in  those  countries 
where  the  Roman  religion  is  established.  Some,  perhaps,  will  tell 
you,  that  simulacrum  and  imago  have  not  exactly  the  same  signi- 
fication. For  answer  to  which,  I  need  only  refer  you  to  a  Latin 
dictionary.  Or,  if  there  should  be  some  small  difference  in  the  sig- 
nification of  these  two  words  (as  I  profess  I  can  find  none),  yet  this 
would  be  but  a  poor  distinction  to  rely  upon  in  matters  of  faith  and 
religion,  upon  which  the  salvation  of  our  souls  depends.  But  I 
must  return  to  the  point  which  I  am  now  upon. 

"  That  the  Church  may  be  the  better  satisfied  that  the  convert  is 
sincere  in  his  profession  of  the  Christian  faith,  he  is  required  to 
repeat  the  Apostles'  Creed  together  with  the  priest,  and  also  to  say 
the  Lord's  Prayer.  Soon  after  which  the  priest  puts  the  same  ques- 
tions to  him,  touching  his  renouncing  of  Satan,  with  all  his  works 
and  pomps,  and  his  belief  of  the  Articles  of  the  Christian  Faith,  and 
receives  the  same  answers,  as  was  done  before  ;  and  then  further 
asks: 

"  '  Priest.— N.     What  dost  thou  desire  V 

"  '  Convert. — Baptism.' 

«  '  Priest.— \N\\t  thou  be  baptized  V 

" '  Convert.—l  will.' 

"  And  then  the  priest  baptizes  him  with  water,  '  In  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost :'  by  which  he  is  ad- 
mitted as  a  member  of  the  Church  of  Christ." 

I  need  not  here  stand  to  give  you  any  fuller  account  of  this  order 
for  administering  baptism  ;  of  which  you  may  fully  satisfy  yourselves 


119 

by  having  recourse  to  the  Roman  ritual,  and  such  of  you  as  do  not 
understand  the  Latin  tongue,  may  have  it  interpreted  to  you  by  any  of 
your  clergy.  But  wliat  I  have  now  faithfully  extracted  out  of  it,  is 
sufficient  to  show,  what  that  faith  and  religion  is,  upon  the  profession 
of  which  alone,  every  person  is,  by  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  to  be 
admitted  a  member  of  your  own  Church ;  and  when  an  infant  is 
brought  to  be  baptized,  his  sureties,  in  his  name,  make  the  very  same 
and  no  other  profession. 

Now  here  I  beseech  you  to  observe,  that  in  all  this  there  is  not  the 
least  word  or  intimation  of  the  Pope  or  his  supremacy,  the  pre-emi- 
nence of  the  Church  of  Rome  above  all  other  churches,  the  doctrine 
of  transubstantiation,  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  the  worshiping  of 
the  host,  the  communion  under  one  kind  or  species  alone,  doctrine 
of  purgatory,  with  masses  and  prayers  for  the  dead,  indulgences, 
praying  to  saints,  worshipping  of  images  and  relics ;  the  number 
of  seven  sacraments,  and  neither  more  nor  fewer,  auricular  confes- 
sion to  a  priest,  penance,  pilgrimages ;  or  of  any  point  whatever, 
which  at  this  time  is  controverted  between  you  and  us.  If,  then, 
neither  the  profession  nor  belief  of  any  of  these  things  is  required  as 
necessary  to  qualify  any  man  to  be  baptized  and  received  as  a  true 
member  of  Christ's  Church,  is  it  not  most  proper  for  you  to  exa- 
mine and  demand  by  what  authority  they  are  imposed  upon  you  to 
be  believed  and  received  as  necessary  to  eternal  salvation  ?  Can  any 
thing  be  necessary  to  salvation,  which  God  (th*  only  Author  and 
Giver  of  salvation)  does  not  require  from  us  1  Or  if  God  does  thus 
require  the  belief  and  profession  of  these  things  from  us,  why  are 
they  not  expressed,  or  at  least  sufficiently  implied  in  that  profession, 
which  every  Christian  is  required  either  in  his  own  person,  (or  if  he 
be  an  infant)  by  his  sureties  to  make,  when  he  is  received  as  a  mem- 
ber of  Christ's  Church  by  baptism  ? 

The  only  answer  to  this  difficulty  that  I  could  ever  meet  with  from 
any  of  you,  is,  "  That  though  those  things  are  not  here  expressed, 
yet  they  are  all  sufficiently  implied  in  that  one  article  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  which  makes  a  part  of  the  Apostle's  Creed  ;  it  being  the  duty 
of  every  single  Christian  to  believe  as  the  Church  believes,  and  that 
therefore  when  you  profess  that  you  believe  the  Holy  Catholic 
Church,  you  therein  profess  the  belief  of  all  those  things  which  the 
Church  (you  say)  believes,  and  has  accordingly  defined;  for  which 
reason  there  are  very  few  of  you  that  ever  give  yourselves  the  trou- 
ble of  making  any  farther  inquiry  into  the  particular  points  of  your 
faith.  But  if  this  be  a  good  answer,  what  necessity  can  there  be  for 
a  Christian  at  the  time  of  his  baptism,  or  indeed  at  any  other  time, 
to  make  profession  of  any  other  article  of  faith  besides  this  of  the 
Holy  Catholic  Church,  in  which  (according  to  this  doctrine)  all  the 
rest  are  sufficiently  implied  and  contained  ;  or  if  it  be  necessary  that 
a  Christian,  at  the  time  of  his  baptism,  or  his  sureties  for  him,  should 
make  profession  of  some  other  articles  of  faith  beside  this  one  ;  why 
not  all  of  them?  Or  what  reason  can  be  given  why  the  profession 
of  faith,  published  by  Pope  Pius  IV.,  in  the  year  1564,  and  now 
universally  received  and  owned  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  as  the  true 


120 

Catholic  faith,  out  of  which  no  man  can  be  saved,  (as  it  is  there  ex- 
pressed) why  this  profession  of  ftiith  (I  say)  should  not  every  Article 
of  it,  be  made  at  the  time  of  baptism  ?  Indeed  the  iiiatter  seems 
very  plainly  to  speak  for  itself,  that  great  numbers  of  learned  men  of 
the  Roman  communion  know  very  well,  that  the  latter  part  of  Pope 
Pius's  profession  of  fliith,  which  we  reject,  was  no  part  of  the  faith 
of  the  ancient  Christian  Church  ;  and,  therefore,  the  governors  of  your 
church  dare  not  make  it  a  part  of  the  baptismal  profession,  lest,  by 
such  an  innovation,  they  should  give  occasion  for  a  schisna  amongst 
yourselves,  which  every  man  may  see,  would,  soon  be  the  conse- 
quence of  the  introduction  of  such  a  practice. 


Q.—Fa(/e  31. 

Several  of  our  own  theologians,  e.  g.,  Bishops  Beveridge  and  Bull 
and  Dr.  Waterland,  have  with  great  learning,  traced  the  succession  of 
doctrine  in  reference  to  the  Holy  Trinity,  and  to  our  Lord's  divinity 
and  consubstantiality  with  the  Father,  through  the  ante-Nicene 
fathers  up  to  the  a^e  of  the  Holy  Apostles.  But  I  recollect  no  in- 
stance, and  venture  to  say  that  none  can  be  produced,  of  their  excusing 
any  ante-Nicene  writer  for  denying  the  consubstantiality,  on  the  ground 
that  this  doctrine  had  not  then  been  defined  by  the  Council  of  Nice. 
The  reason  is  obvious ;  for  if  the  doctrine  of  our  Lord's  divinity  be 
true,  its  truth  is  evidently  such  as  to  be  intrinsically  necessary  to 
salvation  ;  as  necessary  before  the  Council  of  Nice  as  afterwards,  and 
not  first  made  necessary  by  the  definition  of  the  council.  But  when 
Bellarmine  excuses  some  distinguished  men  (and  among  them,  if  I 
remember  right,  Cardinal  Pole),  for  not  believing  the  doctrine  of 
justification,  e.  g.,  as  defined  by  the  Council  of  Trent  before  the  defi- 
nitions were  made,  it  is  plain  that  he  considers  the  necessity  of  the 
doctrine  as  flowing  not  from  its  intrinsic  truth,  but  from  the  authority 
of  the  body  defining  and  imposing  it. 


-R.—Page  33. 

The  clause  affirming  the  procession  from  the  Son  had  been  surrep- 
'titiously  introduced  into  the  creed  in  several  of  the  Western  churches 
before  it  received  the  sanction  of  the  Roman  See.     Pope  Leo  IIL, 


121 

when  the  mattei*  was  referred  to  him,  resolutely  refused  to  sanction 
the  addition ;  and  to  show  his  care  and  reverence  for  the  venerable 
symbol,  he  caused  it  to  be  engraved  in  silver  plates,  one  in  Latin, 
and  another  in  Greek,  in  the  same  words  in  which  the  council  of 
Constantinople  had  penned  it,  commemorating  the  procession  from 
the  Father  only  :  "  In  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord,  the  Giver  of  Life, 
who  proceedeth  from  the  Father,  and  is  with  the  Father  and  the  Son 
to  be  worshiped  and  glorified."  These  plates  were  taken  out  of  the 
Archiva  at  Rome,  says  Bishop  Pearson  from  Photius,  and  so  placed 
by  Leo  that  they  might  be  acknowledged  and  perpetuated  as  the 
true  copies  of  that  creed  not  to  be  altered.  "  Such,"  he  adds,  "  was 
the  great  and  prudent  care  of  Leo  the  Third,  that  there  should  be  no 
addition  made  to  the  ancient  creed  authorized  by  a  general  council, 
and  received  by  the  whole  Church.  But  not  long  after  the  following 
Popes,  more  in  love  with  their  own  authority  than  desirous  of  the 
peace  and  unity  of  the  Church,  neglected  the  tables  of  Leo,  and  ad- 
mitted the  addition,"  which  affirms  the  procession  from  the  Son. 
This  was  probably  first  done,  as  Pearson  states,  by  Pope  Nicholas  I. 
The  common  opinion  of  our  great  divines  who  have  touched  on 
this  subject  is,  that  this  difference  of  expression  involves  no  difference 
of  opinion  between  the  Eastern  and  Western  churches.  There  can 
be  no  doubt,  I  apprehend,  that  the  Greek  Church,  in  retaining  the 
precise  words  of  the  ancient  symbol,  has  retained  also  the  true  faith 
which  they  were  meant  to  express  :  for  all  confess  that  "  The  Holy 
Ghost  proceedeth  from  the  Father."  Neither  can  there  be  a  doubt 
that  t^e  Latin  addition  may  be  safely  used ;  it  being  confessed  by 
all  that  the  Holy  Ghost  proceedeth  from  the  Father,  ^.  c,  from  the 
person  of  the  Father,  and  from  the  Son,  i.  e.,  from  the  substance 
which  is  common  to  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  numerically  one  in 
both.  It  may  be  questioned,  however,  whether  the  unauthorized  ad- 
dition of  the  Roman  Church,  which,  unhappily,  needs  explanation, 
has  not  obscured  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  the  Divine  nature,  and 
given  occasion  to  certain  unhappy  scholastic  disputes,  which,  in  modern 
times,  have  arisen  in  the  West.* 

*  The  curious  and  extraordinary  work  (printed,  but  not  published,  and  dedi- 
cated to  the  Bishops  and  Synods  of  the  Church  in  the  United  States)  of  the  Rev. 
Wilham  Palmer,  deacon,  contains,  p.  284  and  429,  &c.,  a  luminous- comparison  of 
the  Greek  and  Roman  doctrine  on  this  subject.  Whatever  may  be  the  result  of 
Mr.  Palmer's  "  appeal,"  the  collateral  benefits  of  it,  in  raising  the  tone  of  Catholic 
feeling,  and  inspiring  a  respect  for  the  Eastern  Church  among  Christians  of  the 
West,  will,  we  may  hope,  be  great  and  lasting. 


122 

The  point  which  I  wish  to  impress  on  the  reader  is  the  profound 
reverence  which  has  ever  been  cherished  for  the  Catholic  Creed,  as 
declared  t)j  the  ancient  and  oecumenical  councils  of  Nice  and  Con- 
stantinople, of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  and  of  the  perils  to  which  it, 
and  through  it,  the  unity  of  which  it  is  the  bond,  has  been  exposed 
by  the  l«st  of  power  in  the  Roman  See.  With  these  remarks? 
I  annex  the  Bull  of  Pius  IV.,  to  which  reference  is  made  in  the  text, 
in  order  that  the  reader  may  see  the  ground  and  origin  of  the  Papal 
Creed.  The  translation,  which  follows  it,  is  taken  (together  with  the 
Latin)  with  a  few  verbal  alterations  from  an  anonymous  writer  of  the 
17th  century. 

BULLA  SANCTISSIMI  DOMINI  NOSTPJ, 

DOMIXI   PII, 

DIVINA    PROVIDENTIA    PAPiE    QUARTI 

SUPER      FORMA      JURAMENTI      PROFESSIONIS      FIDE  I. 

PIUS,  Episcopus,  Servus  Servorum  Dei,  adperpetuam  Bei  Memoriam. 

Injunctim  nobis  ApostolicjE  servitutis  officium  requirit,  ut  ea  quos 
Dominus  omnipotens  ad  providam  Ecclesiai  sute  directionem,  Sanctis 
Patribus,  in  nomine  suo  congregatis,  Divinitas  inspirare  dignatus  est 
ad  ejus  laudena  et  gloriam  incunctanter  exequi  properemus.  Cum 
itaque  juxta  Concilii  Tridentini  dispositionem  omnes,  quos  deinceps, 
Cathedralibus  &  superioribus  Ecclesiis  prcefici,  vel  quibus  de  illa- 
ru'm  dignitatibus,  canonicatibus,  &  aliis  quibuscunque  beneficiis  Ec- 
clesiasticis,  curara  animarum  habentibus,  provideri  continget,  publi- 
cam  orthodoxaj  fidei  professionem  facere,  seque  in  Romanaj  ^^clesiae 
obedientia  permansuros  spondere,  &  jurare  teneantur:  Nos  volentes, 
etiam  per  quoscunque,  quibus  de  Monasteriis,  Conventibus,  Domibus, 
&  aliis  quibuscunque  locis  Regularibus  quorumcunque  Ordinum,  etiam 
Militarium  quocunque  nomine  vel  titulo  providebitur,  idem  servari, 
&  ad  hoc,  ut  unius  ejusdem  fidei  professio  uniformiter  ab  omnibus 
exhibeatur,  unicaque  &  certa  illius  forma  cunctis  innotescat,  nostrse 
solicitudinis  partes  in  hoc  alicui  minime  desiderai'i,  formam  ipsam 
praesentibus  annotatam,  publicari,  &  ubique  gentium  pereos  ad  quos 
ex  decretis  ipsius  Concilii,  &  alios  prccdictos  spectat,  recipi  &  obser- 
vari,  acsub  pcenis  per  concilium  ipsum  in  contra venientes  latis,  juxta 
banc  &  non  aliam  formam,  professionem  praeJictam  solemniter  fieri 
Auctoritate  Apostolica,  tenorepriesentium  districte  prcecipiendo  man- 
damus hujus  modi  tenore. 

Ego  N.  firma  fide  credo  &  profiteer  omnia  &  singula,  quae  conti- 
nentur  in  Symbolo  fidei,  quo  sancta  Romana  Ecclesia  utitur :  vide- 
licet : — 

Credo  in  unum  Deum  Pat-em  Qnmipotentem,  factorem  coeli  & 
terras,  visibilium  omnium  &  invisibilium,  &  in  unum  Dominum  Jesum 


123 

Christum,  Filiiim  Dei  unigentium,  &  ex  Patre  natum  ante  omnia 
sa3cula,  Deum  de  Deo,  lumen  de  lumine,  Deum  verum  de  Deo  vero, 
genituni  non  factum,  consubstantialem  Patri,  per  quem  omnia  facta 
sunt :  qui  propter  nos  homines  &  propter  nostram  salutem  descendit 
de  ccelis,  &,  incarnatusestdeSpiritu  Sancto  ex  ^laria  Virgine,  &  homo 
factus  est,  crucifixus  etiam  pro  nobis  sub  Pontio  Pilato  passus,  & 
sepultus  est  &  resurrexit  tertia  die  secundum  Scripturas,  &  ascendit 
in  coelum,  sedet  ad  dextram  Patris,  &  iterum  venturus  est  cum  gloria 
judicare  vivos  &  mortuos,  cujus  regni  non  erit  finis :  &  in  Spiritum 
Sanctum  Dominum  et  vivificantem,  qui  ex  Patre,  Filioque  procedit: 
qui  cum  Patre  &  Filio  simul  adoratur  &  conglorificatur,  qui  locutus 
est  per  Prophetas :  &  unam  Sanctam,  Catholicam,  &,  Apostolicam 
Ecclesiam.  Confiteor  unum  baptisma  in  remissionem  peccatorum, 
&  expecto  resurrectionem  mortuorura,  &  vitam  venturi  saeculi. 
Amen. 

1.  Apostolicas  &  Ecclesiasticas  traditiones,  reliquasque  ejusdem 
Ecclesice  observationes  6s  constitutiones  firmissime  admitto  & 
ampleetor. 

2.  Item  sacram  Scripturam  juxtaeum  sensum  quern  tenuit  &  tenet 
sancta  mater  Ecclesia,  cujus  est  judicare  de  vero  sensu  &  interpre- 
tatione  sacrarum  Scripturarum,  admitto,  nee  earn  unquam  nisi  juxta 
unanimem  consensum  Patrum  accipiam,  &  interpretabor. 

3.  Profiteor  quoque  septem  esse  vere  &■  proprie  Sacramenta,  novre 
legis  a  Jesu  Christo  Domino  nostro  instituta,  atque  ad  salutem  humani 
generis,  licet  non  omnia  singulis  necessaria ;  scilicet,  Baptismum, 
Confirmationem,  Eucharistiam,  Poenitentiam,  Extremam  Unctionem, 
Ordinem  &  Matrimonium,  illaque  gratiam  conferre,  et  ex  his  Baptis- 
mum, Confirmationem,  &.  Ordinem,  sine  sacrilegio  reiterari  non 
posse. 

4.  Receptos  quoque  &  approbatos  Ecclesise  CatholicjB  ritus,  in 
supradictorum  omnium  Sacramentorum  solemni  administiatione  re- 
cipio,  et  admitto. 

5.  Omnia  &  singula,  quae  de  peccato  Originjrfi,  &c  de  justificatione 
in  Sacrosancta  Tridentina  Synodo  definita  <Ss  declarata  fuerunt  am- 
pleetor et  recipio. 

6.  Profiteor  pariter  in  Missa  ofFeri  Deo  verum,  proprium  &.  propi- 
tiatorium  sacrificium  pro  vivis  &  defunctis,  atqne  in  sanctissimo  Eu- 
charistiam Sacramento  esse,  vere,  realiter  &  substantialiter  corpus  & 
sanguinem,  una  cum  anima  &  divinitate  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi, 
fierique  conversionem  totius  substantive  panis  in  corpus,  &  totius 
substantia?  vini  in  sanguinem,  quam  conversionem  Catholica  Ecclesia 
transubstantionem  appellat. 

7.  Fateor  etiam  sub  altei'a  tantum  specie,  totum  atque  integrum 
Christum,  verumque  Sacramentum  sumi. 

8.  Constanter  teneo  Purgatorium  esse,  animasque  ibi  detentas  fide- 
lium  suffragiis  adjuvari. 

9.  Similiter  &  sanctos  una  cum  Christo  regnantes,  venerandos 
atque  invocandos  esse,  eosque  orationes  Deo  pro  nobis  offerre,  atque 
eorum  reliquias  esse  venerandas. 

10.  Firmissime  assero  imagines  Christi  ac  Deiparse  semper  Virginis, 


124 

necnon  aliorura  sanctorum   habendas   &  retinendas  esse,  atque  eis 
debitum  honorem  ac  venerationem  impertiendam. 

11.  Indulgentiarumetiam  Potestatem  a  Christoin  Ecclesiarelictam. 
fuisse,  illaruraque  usum  Christiano  populo  maxims  salutarem  esse, 
affirmo, 

12.  Sanctam  Catholicam,  &  Apostolicam  Komanam  Ecclesiam, 
omnium  Ecclesiarum  matrem,  ck;  magistram  agnosco,  Romanoque 
Pontifici  Beat!  Petri  Apostolorum  Principis  successori,  ac  Jesu 
Christi  Vicario  verum  obedientiam  spondeo  ac  juro. 

13.  Cfetera  item  omnia  a  sacris  canonibus,  &  oecumenicis  conciliis, 
ac  pr^cipue  a  sacrosancta  Tridentina  Synodo  tradita,  definita,  &  de- 
clarata,  indubitanter  recipio,  atque  profiteor,  simulque  contraria  omnia 
atque  hgereses  quasounque  ab  Ecclesia  damnatas,  rejeotas,  &  anathe- 
matizatas,  ego  pariter  damno  rejicio  &  anathematizo. 

14.  Hanc  veram  Catholicam  fidem  extra  quam  nemo  salvus  esse 
potest,  quam  iu  prjEsenti  sponte  profiteor,  &  veraciter  teneo,  eandem 
inte^ram  &  inviolatam,  usque  ad  extremum  vitse  spiritum,  constantis- 
sime  (Deo  juvante)  retiuere  &  confiteri,  atque  a  meis  subditis  vel 
illis,  quorurti  cura  ad  me  in  munere  meo  spectabit,  teneri,  doceri,  & 
prsedicari,  quantum  in  me  erit,  curaturum. 

Ego  idem  N.  spondeo,  voveo,  ac  juro  sic  me  Deus  adjuvet,  &  hsec 
sancta  Dei  Evangelia ! 

Volumus  autem  quod  prtesentes  literJB  in  Cancellaria  nostra  Apos- 
tolica,  de  more,  legantur :  &  ut  omnibus  facilius  pateant,  in  ejus 
Quinterno  describantur,  ac  etiam  imprimantur,  Nulli  ergo  omnino 
horainum  liceat  hanc  paginam  nostra?  voluntatis  &  mandati  infringers, 
vel  ei  ausu  temerario  contraire.  Siquis  autem  hoc  attentare  proesump- 
serit  indignationem  omnipotentis  Dei,  ac  Beatorum  Petri  &  Pauli, 
Apostolorum  ejus  se  noverit  incursurum. 

Datum  Romje,  apud  Sanctum  Petrum,  Anno  Incarnationis 
DominioEB  Millesimo  quingentesimo  sexagesimo  quarto, 
"^    "      Idibus  Novembris,  Pontificatus  nostri  Anno  quinto, 

Eed,  Cardinalis  C^sius, 

Cee.  Glorierius. 

Lectis  &  publicataj  fuerunt  suprascriptaeliterseRomae  in  Cancellaria 
Apostolica  Anno  Incarnationis  Dominican  Millesimo  quingentesimo 
sexagesimo  quarto.  Die  vero  sabbati,  Nona  Mensis  Decembris, 
Pontificatus  sanctissimi  in  Christo  Patris  &  Domini  nostri  Pii  Papoe 
Quarti,  Anno  quinto. 

A.    LOMELTNUS    CUSTOS. 


125 


THE  BULL  OF  OUR  MOST  HOLY  LORD, 

THE   LORD   PIUS, 

BY    DIVINE    PROVIDENCE    THE    IV.    OF    THAT    NAME, 
UPON    THE    FORM    OF    THE    OATH    OF    THE    PROFESSIOX    OF    THE    FAITH. 

PIUS,  Bishop,  Servant  of  the  Servants  of  God^  that  these  Presents 
may  he  of  everlasting  Memory. 

The  office  of  apostolical  service  incumbent  upon  us,  requireth,  that 
such  things  as  Almighty  God,  for  the  provident  government  of  his 
Church,  hath  deigned   by  his  divine  Spirit  to   inspire  into  the  Holy 
Fathers  congregated  in  his  name,  we,  without  delay,  hasten   to  exe- 
cute to  his  praise  and  glory.    Seeing,  therefore,  it  is  so  disposed  by  the 
Council  of  Trent,  that  all  such  as  hereafter  shall  be  promoted  to  any 
prsefectship  in  cathedral  or  other  great  churches,  or  to  whom  it  shall 
happen  to  be  provided  for  out  of  the  dignities,  canonries,  and  what- 
soever other   ecclesiastical    benefices  of  the  said  churches,  having    a 
curateship,  shall   be  obliged  to  make  a  public  profession  of  orthodox 
faith,  and  to  promise  and  swear,  that  they  shall  ever  persevere  in  the 
obedience  of  the  Church  of  Rome ;  we  also  having  a  will  that  the 
same  be  observed  and  practised  by  all  such  as  shall  be  provided  for 
out  of  monasteries,  convents,  houses,  and  whatsoever  other  places  of 
regulars  of  whatsoever  ordcs,  even  of  military  professions,   under 
whatsoever  name  or  title,  and  desiring  also  that  so  much  solicitude  as 
concerns  ourself,  may  not  to  any  one  seem  to  be  wanting  in  this  matter, 
to  the  end  that  a  profession   of  one  and  the   same  faith  may  be  uni- 
formly made  by  all,  and  one  only  and  certain  form  thereof  may  be  ex- 
hibited to  all ;  we,  by  apostolical  authority  and  by  the  tenour  of  these 
presents,  districtly  commanding,   command,  that  the  form  which  is 
expressed  in  these  presents,  be  published,  and  throughout  all  nations, 
by  those  to  whom  it  belongs,  according  to  the  decrees  of  the  said 
council,  and  by  others  above  said,  be  received  and  observed,  and 
under  such  pains  as  the  said  council  hath  decreed  against  the  refractory, 
the  said  profession  shall  be  solemnly  made  in  this  following  and  no 
other  form,  and  under  this  following  tenour. 

I,  N.,  with  firm  faith,  believe  and  profess  all  and  several  the  things 
which  are  contained  in  the  symbol  of  faith  which  the  Church  of  Rome 
doth  use,  to  wit ; — 

I  believe  in  one  God  the  Father  Almighty,  maker  of  heaven  and 
earth,  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible,  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  and  born  of  the  Father  before 
all  time,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  true  God  of  true  God,  begotten 
and  not  made,  consubstantial  with  the  Father,  by  whom  all  things 
were  made.  Who  for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation  descended  from 
heaven  and  took  flesh  by  the  Holy  Ghost  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and 
was  made  man,  crucified  also  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate,  suffered, 
and  was  buried,  and  rose  again  the  third  day  according  to  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  ascended  into  heaven,  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father, 
and  is  to  come  again  with  glory  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  of 


126 

whose  kingdom  shall  be  no  end  :  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord, 
and  giver  of  life,  who  proceedeth  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  is 
adored  and  glorified  together  with  the  Father  and  the  Son,  who  spake 
by  the  prophets  :  and  one  holy  Catholick  and  Apostolick  Church.  I 
confess  one  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  expect  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead,  and  the  life  of  the  world  to  come.     Amen. 

1.  I  most  firmly  receive  and  embrace  the  apostolical  and  ecclesi- 
astical traditions,  and  all  other  customs  and  constitutions  of  the  same 
Church. 

2.  Also  I  admit  the  holy  Scripture  in  that  sense  which  the  holy 
mother  Church  hath  held  and  holdeth,  to  whom  it  belongs  to  judge 
of  the  true  sense  and  interpretation  of  the  holy  Scriptures  ;  nor  will  I 
ever  receive  or  interpret  them  but  according  to  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  Fathers. 

3.  I  profess  also  that  there  are  seven  true  and  proper  Sacraments 
of  the  new  law,  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  for  the  salvation 
of  mankind,  although  all  are  not  necessary  to  each  one  ;  to  wit, 
Order,  Baptism,  Confirmation,  Eucharist,  Penance,  Extreme  Unction, 
Matrimony  ;  and  that  these  all  give  grace,  and  that  of  these  Baptism, 
Confirmation,  and  Order,  cannot  be  reiterated  without  sacrilege. 

4.  I  also  receive  and  admit  all  received  and  approved  rites  of  the 
Catholic  Church  in  the  solemn  administration  of  all  the  above  said 
sacraments. 

5.  I  also  embrace  and  receive  all  and  several  the  things  which  have 
been  defined  and  declared  in  the  sacred  and  holy  synod  of  Trent  con- 
cerning original  sin  and  justification. 

6.  1  also  profess  that  in  the  mass  there  is  offered  to  God  a  true, 
proper,  and  propitiatory  sacrifice  for  the  living  and  the  dead,  and  that 
in  the  most  holy  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  is  contained  truly,  really, 
and  substantially  the  Body  and  Blood  together  with  the  soul  and 
divinity  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  there  is  made  a  perfect  change 
of  the  whole  substance  of  the  bread  into  his  body,  and  of  the  whole  sub- 
stance of  the  wine  into  his  blood;  which  change  the  Catholick  Church 
calleth  transubstantiation. 

7.  I  confess,  also,  that  whole  and  entire  Christ  and  the  true  Sacra- 
ment is  received  under  one  only  species,  [of  bread.) 

8.  I  constantly  hold  that  there  is  a  purgatory,  and  that  souls  there 
detained  are  holpen  by  the  suffrages  of  the  faithful. 

9.  Likewise  that  the  saints  reigning  with  Christ,  are  to  be  worshipped 
and  invocated,  and  that  they  offer  prayers  for  us  to  God,  and  that 
their  relics  are  to  be  worshipped. 

10.  I  most  firmly  assert  that  the  images  of  Christ,  the  Virgin  Mary, 
and  of  the  other  saints,  are  to  be  had  and  kept,  and  duty  of  honour 
and  worship  to  be  given  to  them. 

11.  I  also  affirm  that  the  power  of  indulgences  was  left  in  the 
Church  by  Christ,  and  that  the  use  of  them  is  most  conducive  to  the 
salvation  of  the  Christian  people. 

12.  The  holy  Catholick  and  Apostolick  Church  of  Rome  I  ac'cnow- 
ledge  to  be  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches  ;  and  I  vow,  swear, 


127 

and  promise  true  obedience  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  successor  of 
B.  Peter,  Prince  of  the  Apostles  and  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ. 

13.  Alho  all  and  whatsoever  other  things  delivered  by  way  of 
tradition,  defined  and  declared  by  the  holy  Canons,  and  the  General 
Councils,  and  chiefly  by  the  sacred  and  holy  synod  of  Trent,  I  un- 
doubtedly receive  and  profess:  and  at  the  same  time  all  contrary 
things  and  heresies  whatsoever,  by  the  Church  damned,  rejected  and 
accursed,  I  also  damn,  reject,  and  accurse. 

14.  This  true  Catholick  faith,  without  which  no  man  can  be  saved  • 
which  at  this  present  1  freely  profess  and  truly  hold,  T,  the  same  N.' 
do  promise,  vow,  and  swear  most  constantly,  God  assisting,  to  retain 
and  confess  entire  and  inviolate  to  the  very  last  gasp  of  life  •  and  to 
procure,  as  m-ch  as  shall  lie  in  me,  that  the  same  be  held,  taught,  and 
preached  by  all  my  inferiours,  and  by  those  who  are  committed  to 
my  care  and  charge.  So  God  help  me,  and  these  holy  Gospels  of 
God  ! 

Moreover,  it  is  our  will  that  these  present  letters  be  read  in  our 
Apostolical  Chancery  according  to  the  custom;  and,  that  they  may 
be  more  open  to  all,  they  shall  be  written  in  the  Quintern  of  our  said 
Chancery,  and  also  imprinted. 

Therefore  it  shall  be  lawful  to  no  man  whatsoever  to  infringe  the 
page  of  this  our  will  and  commandment,  or  with  daring  rashness  to 
contradict  it.  But  if  any  one  be  so  presumptuous  as  to  attempt  that 
let  him  know  that  he  sliall  incur  the  indignation  of  Almighty  God' 
and  of  the  B.  Peter  and  Paul  his  apostles.  ' 

Given  at  Rome,  at  S.  Peter's,  Ann.  Chr.    1  564,  the  Ides  of 
November,  in  the  fifth  year  of  our  Pontificate. 

Fed.  Cardinalis  C.esius. 

Cce.  Glorierius. 

The  letters  above-written  were  read  and  published  at  Rome  in  the 
Apostolical  Chancel,  Ann.  1504,  on  Saturday  the  9th  of  December 
in  the  fifth  year  of  the  Pontificate  of  the  Most  Holy  Father  and  Lord 
jn  Christ,  our  Lord  Pope  Pius  the  Fourth. 

A.  LOMELINUS  CUSTOS. 

In  this  Bull  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  acting  as  the  executive  of  the 
Holy  Fathers,  i.  e.,  the  College  of  Cardinals,  sets  forth  and  com- 
mands to  be  received  as  of  faith,  certain  things  which  the  Spirit  of 
God,  (as  it  is  professed)  had  inspired  into  them  when  congregated 
in  His  name. 

The  first  point  is,  that  every  Christian  "  promise  with  firm  faith  to 
believe  and  profess  al!  and  several  the  things  which  are  contained  in 
the  symbol  of  faith  which  the  holy  Church  of  Rome  doth  use." 

The  symbol  or  creed  which  follows,  consists  of  two  parts.  The 
former  part  is  the  ancient  and  well  known  Catholic  Creed ;  the  other 


128 

part,  which  was  never  heard  of  until  the  publication  of  this  Bull,  is 
properly  the  Roman  or  Papal  Creed. 

It  deserves  to  be  remarked  that,  whereas,  the  Catholic  creed  comes 
to  us  directly  from  the  Councils  of  Nice  and  Constantinople,  and  is 
their  own  act  and  profession,  the  Roman  creed  comes  from  the  Coun- 
cil of  Trent,  at  second  hand,  being  compiled  out  of  its  voluminous 
proceedings  by  the  Pope  and  his  Cardinals. 

The  first  article  of  the  Roman  creed  is,  "I  most  firmly  receive  and 
embrace  the  apostolical  and  ecclesiastical  traditions,  and  all  other 
customs  and  traditions  of  the  same  Church  ;"  i.  e.,  the  Church  of  Rome, 
which  was  mentioned  expressly  in  the  outset.  The  next  article  is,  "  I 
admit  the  holy  Scripture  in  that  sense  which  the  holy  mother  Church 
both  held  and  holdeth,"  &;c. ;  and  if  we  wish  to  know  what  is  meant 
by  "  holy  motlier  Church,"  we  must  turn  to  the  twelfth  article,  which 
declares  the  Church  of  Rome  to  be  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all 
churches,  and  exacts  an  oath  of  obedience  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome. 

Tluis  the  compilers  of  this  creed  have  contrived  to  work  into  it  a 
covert  confession  that  the  Church  of  Rome  is  virtually  the  Catholic 
Church.  I  am  not  aware  that  the  Council  of  Trent  has  inserted  this 
point  among  its  definitions  of  faith. 

One  feature  of  this  Roman  creed  is  remarkable ;  and  that  is,  the 
diminutive  form  of  its  expressions ;  a  form  proper  in  the  definitions 
of  Trent  for  the  determination  of  controversies,  but  a  mere  engine  of 
craft  when  used,  as  in  this  creed,  to  conceal  matters  which  plainly  and 
honestly  avowed  might  be  promptly  rejected.  This  is  especially  exem- 
plified in  the  8th,  9th,  10th,  and  1  Ith  articles,  which,  though  very  soft 
in  expression,  are  made  to  uphold  the  most  stupendous  abuses  ;  and 
are,  in  fact,  mere  bands  to  tie  the  corpse  of  Popery  to  the  living  body 
of  Catholicism. 

The  same  feeling  which  restrained  me  from  making  any  comments, 
not  required  by  my  argument  on  the  tem2yer  of  the  Bulls  of  Paul  III. 
and  Pius  V.,  (see  Appendix  Mm  and  K,)  restrains  me  also  in  the  pre- 
sent instance.  The  three  Bulls  are  equally,  though  in  different  ways, 
manifestations  of  the  spirit  of  the  Roman  papacy  ;  but  what  manner  of 
spirit  it  is  which  they  manifest,  is  a  point  which  may  be  safely  left  to 
the  calm  reflection  of  the  reader. 

It  is  difficult,  however,  to  restrain  an  expression  of  sorrow  and 
indignation  when  one  sees  the  adulterate  matter  of  this  Papal 
creed,  the  mere  sweepings  of  the  schools,  put  on  a  level  with 
the  sublime  and  awful  confession  of  the  Catholic  Church.  That 
such   a   heap  of    opinions  should  be   raised  to  the  name   of  the 


129 

Catholic  Faith,  is  indeed  a  natural  consequence  of  the  fundamental 
principle  of  the  Roman  Church,  viz.,  that  ii  is  virtually  the  Catholic 
Church  ;  but  this  very  assumption,  and  the  consequent  imposition  of 
these  inferior  matters,  as  terms  of  communion  for  all  other  churches, 
is  itself  a  most  palpable  and  flagrant  violation  of  the  golden  maxim  : 
"  Unity  in  faith,  liberty  in  opinion,  and  charity  in  all  things,"  What- 
ever particular  Church  may  separate  from  the  Church  of  Rome,  in 
consequence  of  the  imposition  of  this  new  creed  as  a  creed,  and  of  the 
matters  contained  in  it  as  necessary  to  salvation,  the  cause,  and  there- 
fore the  guilt  of  such  separation  and  schism,  belong,  on  Catholic  prin- 
ciples, to  the  party  that  imposes  it. 


S.—Fa(fe  36. 

I  say,  "  power  of  government,"  or  jurisdiction  over  all  Christians 
and  all  Churches,  and  ap2^ointed  hy  Christ  ;  for  as  it  was  not  from 
the  Catholic  Church,  but  only  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  that  the  Church  of  England  originally  withdrew,  so  a  supre- 
macy of  power  or  authority  conferred  by  Christ  on  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  over  the  whole  universal  Church,  is  all  that  we  have  occasion 
to  deny.  What  symbolical  significance  the  fothers  may  attribute  to 
the  pre-eminence  of  St.  Peter,  (the  prince  of  the  apostles,  as  was 
Homer  the  prince  of  poets,)  or  what  station  the  ancient  Church  may 
have  accorded  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  for  the  preservation  of  unity 
and  order,  are  at  this  day  questions  of  no  practical  moment ;  since 
the  claim  now  set  up  under  the  specious  name  and  pretence  of  *'  a 
centre  of  unity,"  is  not  for  a  primacy  of  order,  or  even  for  a  govern- 
ing power  delegated  by  the  Church,  but  for  a  supremacy  of  power 
and  authority  over  the  whole  Church,  conferred  immediately  by  its 
Divine  Head.  It  is  folly  and  mockery  (I  hope  it  is  never  fraud  and 
duplicity)  for  Romanists  to  multiply  words  about  the  principium 
unitatis,  and  the  deference  anciently  accorded  to  the  Pope  of  Rome 
by  other  popes,*  his  equals  by  divine  institution,  when  by  the  asser- 
tion of  a  universal  supremacy  for  their  Pope,  founded  on  God's  ap- 
pointment, they  have  made  a  wreck  of  Catholic  unity,  and  embroiled 

*  The  appellation  of  Pope  (Papa)  wrs,  anciently,  given  to  all  Christian 
Bishops;  but  about  the  latter  end  of  the  11th  century,  iu  the  Pontificate  of 
Gregory  VII.,  it  was  usurped  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  whose  pectiliar  title  it  hai 
•Ter  since  continued- — See  Appendix  T.     Note,  pp.  143,  144. 

9 


130 

in  war  and  blood  almost  every  nation  in  -which  they  have  lived. 
Only  one  explanation  can  be  given  of  this  readiness  of  Eomanists  to 
prove  what  we  are  not  concerned  to  deny,  and  that  is,  their  inability 
to  prove  the  precise  point  which  we  do  deny  ;  for  when  they  come 
to  this,  they  handle  it  tenderly  and  evasively,  and  advance  no  argu- 
ment which  has  not  been  answered  again  and  again  by  their  own 
men  ;  and  popes  among  the  number.  What  better  does  Bellarmine 
than  trifle  on  this  point  ?  He  tells  us  in  his  fourth  book,  De  Romano 
Pont.  (chap.  23d,)  in  the  words  of  St.  Cyprian,  that  our  Lord  gave, 
l^arem  i^testatem^  equal  power  and  authority  to  all  his  apostles  when 
he  said  to  them,  "  As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you." 
But  if  all  were  made  equal  in  power,  how  could  one  have  the  rest  in 
subjection  %  Nothing  easier,  if  you  will  believe  the  cardinal  ;  for 
thus  he  discourseth,  (Ibid.  lib.  1,  c.  12.)  "St.  Cyprian  says  nothing 
against  our  opinion,  for  we  confess  that  the  apostles  were  equal  in 
apostolic  power,  and  had  entirely  the  same  authority  over  Christian 
peoples,  but  [we  contend]  that  they  were  not  equal  among  them- 
selves ;"  thus  distinguishing  without  making  a  difference,  and  grant- 
ing all  we  ask  ;  for  if  the  apostles  and  their  successors  have  alto- 
gether the  same  authority  conferred  on  them  by  Christ  over  Chris- 
tian people,  how  can  it  be  said  that  Christ  has  ordained  all  Christian 
peojjle  to  be  subject  only  to  one  and  his  successor,  (supposing  for 
argument's  sake  the  Bishop  of  Eome  to  be  that  successor,)  exclu- 
sively of  the  rest  %  If  the  author  had  said. that  though  all  were  equal  in 
'power  yet  one  was  superior  in  order  to  the  rest,  he  would  have  spoken 
intelligibly,  though  not  to  the  advantage  of  his  cause. 

It  is  a  just  and  beautiful  thought  of  St.  Cyprian,  in  his  treatise  on 
the  Unity  of  the  Church,  and  in  the  very  place  but  just  referred  to, 
that  our  Lord,  in  constituting  His  Church,  though  He  conferred  equal 
power  on  all  His  apostles,  yet,  to  manifest  His  regard  to  unity.  He 
took  His  rise  from  one-,  and  settled  the  whole  upon  that  foundation. 
"  The  other  apostles,"  he  says,  "  were,  in  truth,  what  Peter  was,  en- 
titled to  an' equal  share  with  him  of  dignity  and  power;  but,"  he 
adds,  "the  process  began  with  one,  that  the  Church  might  be  consi- 
dered as  o?ie."  How  little  reason  the  Protestant  Church  has  to 
abstain  from  this  pious  reflection,  because  the  Romanists  have  sought 
to  turn  it  into  an  argument  for  their  supremacy,  will  sufficiently  ap, 
pear  from  the  calm  note  on  the  passage  of  Cyprian  by  his  learned 
translator,  Dr.  Marshall,  A.  D.,  1717: — 

"  It  will  be  pretty  difficult  for  the  Church  of  Rome  to  confirm  the 
pretensions  of  her  bishop,  by  an  argument  rather  designed  for  illustra- 


131 

tion  than  for  strict  reasoning;  in  which  sort  of  discourse  we  know 
'tis  not  unusual  to  take  a  liberty  of  alluding  to  diverse  passages,  from 
which  no  conclusive  proof  is  ever  intended.  Our  author's  argument 
here  is  plainly  of  this  sort;  and  he  proceeds  in  it  upon  an  allusion  to 
Christ's  choice  of  Peter  to  feed  his  sheep,  and  to  found  his  Church  in 
the  singular  number.  But  yet  even  upon  this  very  argument  he 
plainly  enough  declares,  that  in  strictness  of  reckoning  the  other 
apostles  were  what  Peter  was.  And  in  his  33d  epistle  he  expressly 
asserts,  that  the  Church  is  founded  upon  bishops  in  the  plural  ;  and 
indeed  his  whole  management  with  Cornelius,  and  with  Steven,  bishops 
of  Rome,  shows  he  esteemed  his  episcopal  chair  in  no  degree  inferior  to 
theirs.  Origen  hath  put  a  question,  which,  if  he  now  were  living, 
would  greatly  expose  him  to  the  danger  of  the  inquisition;  if  you. 
think  (saith  he)  that  the  whole  Church  is  founded  singly  upon  the  per- 
son of  Peter,  what  will  become  of  John,  that  son  of  thunder,  and  in- 
deed of  all  the  other  apostles'?  lie  plainly  makes  there  the  confes- 
sion of  Peter,  the  rock  upon  which  Christ  would  build  his  Church,  and 
saith,  that  we  may  all  have  our  parts  in  the  honour  of  thus  founding  it,  if 
we  will  make  the  same  confession  which  Peter  did.  See  him  in  tract 
1,  on  St.  Matthew,  xvi.,  where  he  likewise  observes,  that  other 
bishops  claimed  and  exercised  the  same  authority  with  Peter,  and 
had  a  right  to  do  so,  if  they  would  but  endeavour  to  inherit  his  vir- 
tues, as  well  as  his  power.  Irenaeus  indeed  hath  given  the  true 
reason  of  all  the  precedency  which  the  Roman  see  hath  enjoyed,  and 
he  speaks  for  it  in  terms  as  high  as  most  of  the  ante-Nicene  fathers : 
ad  hanc  ecclesiam  (viz.  Romanam)  propter  potentiorem  principalita- 
tem,  necesse  est  omnem  convenire  ecclesiam — in  qua  semper  ab  his 
qui  sunt  undique  conservata  est  ea  quae  est  ab  apostolis  traditio. 
(Haeres,  lib.  iii.,  cap.  3.)  Now  it  is  no  wonder  that  a  Church,  which 
was  fixed  in  the  imperial  seat,  and  which  happened  to  preserve  at 
that  time  an  uncorrupted  purity  of  doctrine,  should  have  a  regard 
paid  to  it  superior  to  any  other  single  Church.  It  had  indeed  better 
means  and  helps  for  preserving  the  purity  of  its  doctrine,  from  the 
circumstance  of  its  being  so  near  the  imperial  seat;  where  the  great- 
est numbers  of  good  and  able  men  might  naturally  be  expected  ; 
and  from  whence  the  records  of  what  had  been  delivered  by  the 
apostles  might  more  faithfully  and  fully  be  transmitted,  than  they 
could  be  from  any  other  Church.  We  could  wish  it  were  so  now  ;. 
and  then  we  should  be  less  apt  todisputa  with  her  bishop  any  pre- 
cedences which  he  could  reasonably  claim." — MarshaWs  Cyprian. 
Part  i.,  p.  97. 


132 

P.  S.  1  have  said  nothing  of  the  claim  to  the  obedience  of  the 
British  churches,  sometimes  set  up  for  the  Bishop  of  Rome  on  the 
ground  of  his  being  "  the  Patriarch  of  the  Western  Church,"  because 
the  question  of  a  patriarchate  founded  on  human  right  is  entirely 
foreign  to  the  real  question  at  issue  ;  which  respects  a  supremacy^  as 
universal  bishop,  founded  on  divine  right.  It  may,  however,  be  well 
enough  to  remark,  that  "  Patriarch  of  the  Western  Church,"  though  a 
very  sonorous  title,  has  nothing  more  to  recommend  it  than  its  sound ; 
the  Patriarchate  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  while  it  lasted,  having  com- 
prised only  a  part  of  Italy  and  the  islands  of  Sicily,  Sardinia  and 
Corsica.  In  fact,  there  is  not  a  shadow  of  proof  that  any  such 
patriarchal  power  was  recognized  in  the  British  churches  during  the 
first  six  centuries,  but  clear  proof  to  the  contrary.  What  the  ancient 
Church  would  have  thought  of  the  claim  of  the  Roman  Patriarch  to 
jurisdiction  in  Britain,  if  it  had  ever  been  made,  may  be  seen  from 
the  eighth  canonof  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  quoted  pp.  53,54,  of  this 
Appendix.  About  the  year  600,  the  Saxons  were  converted  under 
the  great  and  good  Pope  Gregory.  A  very  few  years  afterwards  the 
Pope  of  Rome  began  to  usurp,  under  the  grant  of  an  usurping  em- 
peror, the  title  of  Universal  Bishop,  which  is  totally  inconsistent  with 
that  of  patriarch  ;  so  that  in  truth  "  the  Patriarchate  of  the  Western 
Church"  is  a  figment.  Whoever  wishes  to  examine  the  subject  may 
consult  the  brief  treatise  of  the  learned  Cave,  on  the  Ancient  Church 
Government,*  and  particularly  the  fifth  chapter,  on  the  bounds  of  the 
Roman  Patriarchate  ;  and  Bramhall's  Just  Vindication,  chapter  ninth. 
Bishop  Bilson,  who  wrote  in  the  IGth  century,  has  summed  up  the 
merits  of  the  case  in  a  few  words  :  "  As  for'  his  [the  Bishop  of 
Rome's]  Patriarchate,  by  God's  law  he  hath  none  ,  in  this  realm  for 
six  hundred  years  after  Christ  he  had  none  ;  for  the  last  six  hundred 
years,  looking  after  greater  matters,  he  ivould  have  none  ;  above,  or' 
against,  the  prince's  sword  he  can  have  none ;  to  the  subversion  of 
the  faith  or  oppression  of  his  brethren,  he  ought  to  have  none  :  you 
must  seek  further  for  subjection  to  his  tribunal ;  this  land  oweth  him 
none." 

*  In  Carey's  edition  of  Cave's  Works,  the  'Dissertation  on  Church  Government 
is  appended  to  the  "  Primitive  Christianity." 


133 


T.—Page  39. 

There  is  scarcely  a  natiou  in  Europe  which  has  not  been  embroiled 
in  contests  with  the  See  of  Rome  in  consequence  of  its  intolerable 
oppression  and  extortion ;  and  the  history  of  every  contest  has 
proved  the  wisdom  of  the  Church  of  England  in  utterly  renouncing 
the  supremacy  which  other  churches  have  vainly  endeavoured  to 
limit.  The  Galilean  Church  is  a  remarkable  instance.  It  once  en- 
joyed rights  and  liberties  similar  to  those  which  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, in  the  sixteenth  century,  claimed  as  her  ancient  inheritance, 
and  has  at  times  courageously  asserted  those  rights  and  liberties  in 
opposition  to  the  Court  of  Rome.  Witness  the  declaration  of  the 
Galilean  clergy,  A,  D.  1682,  and  the  proceedings  of  the  Parliament 
of  Paris  in  1687  ;  in  which  they  say,  among  other  things  to  the  same 
effect :  "  The  king  is  most  religious  in  nominating  to  the  prelacies 
ecclesiastics  of  an  exemplary  integrity,  and  of  conspicuous  merit ; 
and  because  that  these  ecclesiastics  do  not  believe  that  the  Pope  is 
infallible;  that  they  do  not,  like^the  Italian  doctors,  attribute  to  him 
the  title  of  tiuiversal  monarch  ;  that  they  are  persuaded  he  has  no 
power  either  direct  or  indirect  over  the  temporality  of  kings  ;  and 
that  he  is  to  all  intents  inferior  to  the  councils,  that  have  a  right  to 
correct  him  and  reform  his  decisions  ;  the  Pope,  upon  this  imaginary 
pretence,  refuses  these  Bulls,  and  leaves  the  third  j^art  of  the  churches 
of  the  kingdom  destitute  of  jJastors.  Is  this  imitating  the  care  and 
lenity  of  the  apostles  in  the  government  of  the  Church?"  They 
add,  however,  notwithstanding  their  complaints  and  grievances  : 
"  We  shall  ever  remain  inseparably  united  to  the  Holy  See  ;  we  will 
acknow'ledge  St.  Peter's  successor  as  the  first  and  chief  of  the 
bishops  ;  we  will  most  religiously  maintain  the  communion  and  cor- 
respondence with  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  will  defend  ourselves 
with  as  much  moderation  as  vigor  against  the  insults,  invasions  and 
innovations  contrary  to  the  king's  rights,  to  the  dignity  of  his  crown, 
to  the  decrees  of  the  councils,  to  the  general  policy  of  our  Church,  and 
to  our  liberties." 

It  was  soon  after  this  struggle,  in  which  Rome  gained  the  victory, 
that  Leslie,  an  English  divine,  addressed  the  following  words  to 
Bossuet : 

"  I  am  inclinable  to  believe,  that  if  your  lordship  in  particular, 
and  other  bishops  in  the  Galilean  Church,  were  at  liberty,  each  in  his 
own  district,  to  regulate  such  matters  as  you  might  do  with  a  good 


134 

conscience,  things  might  he  brought  to  bear  so,  from  such  a  happy- 
beginning  of  reformation,  as  that  though  men  might  differ  in  some 
particular  opinions,  as  they  always  will,  yet  that  terms  of  communion 
might  be  adjusted  between  us,  upon  Catholic  principles,  to  the  honour 
of  God,  and  peace  of  His  Church.  And  if  such  a  communion  were 
begun,  though  but  with  a  few  bishops,  who  would  exert  their  just 
power,  it  might  bring  the  Church  to  that  state,  in  time,  in  w-hich  all 
good  men  wish  to  see  her.  And  if  a  Catholic  communion  w^ere  re- 
stored, we  should  see  again  the  primitive  face  of  the  Church.  But 
no  step  can  be  made  towards  this  while  the  Pope's  supremacy  ties 
up  the  power  of  all  other  bishops  in  their  own  respective  churches  ; 
and  we  hardly  expect  that  he  will  give  way  to  any  thing  that  will  in 
the  least  infringe  the  plenitude  of  his  supremacy.  You  have  made 
an  experiment  of  it  in  your  general  assembly  of  1G82.  And  if  he 
will  not  suffer  his  supremacy  to  be  limited  and  reduced  to  the  stand- 
ard of  the  ancient  canons,  we  can  see  no  remedy,  my  lord,  but  that  it 
must  be  taken  away.  Why  should  we  have  any  hesitation  to  take 
that  out  of  the  way,  which  is  the  visible  remora  to  the  uniting  of  all 
Christian  churches,  and  the  restoring  of  Catholic  communion  all  the 
world  over?  to  take  that  out  of  the  way,  which  your  bishops  of 
France,  as  well  as  those  of  the  Greek  Church,  and  ours  in  England, 
are  fully  convinced  is  an  usurpation  %  against  which  you  have  often 
struggled,  and  still  do  complain  ;  but  we  have  thrown  it  off,  seeing 
no  other  way  possible  to  get  from  under  its  usurpation." 

But  the  supremacy  was  not  renounced  in  France ;  and  the  Court 
of  Rome,  watching  its  opportunities,  has  contrived,  in  every  change 
of  public  affairs,  to  extort  further  concessions,  and  to  forge  new  links 
in  the  chain  that  binds  the  French  Church  to  a  foreign  ruler.  The 
following,  from  the  London  Times  (which  I  find  in  the  New- York 
Times  of  April  2Tth),  will  show  how  the  case  stands  under  Na- 
poleon III. 

"  The  Court  of  Rome  seems  to  have  demanded  as  the  price  of 
undertaking  the  consecration  of  such  a  sovereign  as  Louis  Napoleon, 
several  important  concessions,  such  as  the  surrender  of  certain  of  the 
organic  articles  touching  the  Church,  which  were  annexed  to  the  Con- 
cordat of  1801  by  Napoleon  I.,  though  never  recognized  by  the  Vati- 
can, and,  more  especially,  a  change  in  the  present  provisions  of  the 
French  law  of  marriage,  which  renders  it  necessary  that  the  legal 
contract  should  be  completed  before  the  solemnization  of  the  religious 
ceremony.  The  High  Catholic  party  demand,  on  the  contrary,  that 
the  sacrament  (as  they  consider  marriage  to  be)  should  precede  the 
•civil  contract.  These  questions  have  added  fuel  to  the  flame  already 
kindled  by  the  pretensions  of  the  Ultramontane  writers  and  prelates 
of  France,  and  by  the  evident  design  of  the  whole  Romish  clergy  to 
.assert  a  degree  of  power  in  the  State  which  it  never  obtained,  even 
in  the  latter  years  of  Charles  X.  For  instance,  the  other  day  a  young 
.man  was  put  upon  his  trial  at  Rouen,  convicted,  and  sentenced  to 


135 

fourteen  days'  imprisonment,  for  the  offence  of  receiving  the  holy 
commmiion  before  he  had  been  confirmed  by  the  bishop.     It  is  a 
revival  of  the  spirit  that  dictated  the  Law  of  Sacrilege,  and  the  most 
unpopular  and  intolerant  measures  of  the  Restoration.     The  Komish 
clergy  are   endeavouring  to  arm  their  spiritual  authority  with  the 
terrors  of  civil  justice,  and  to  place  the  State,  in  all  its  public  func- 
tions, in  closer  dependency  on  the  Church.     These  pretensions  of  a 
part  of  the  clergy,  who  are  at  once  arrogant  towards  their  own  civil 
rulers  and  servile  to  a  foreign  power,  are  supported  by  Cardinal 
Gousset,  Archbishop  of  Rheims,  who  endeavoured,  ten  years  ago,_to 
bring  all  the  liturgies  of  France  to  the   standard  of  the  Romish 
breviary,  the  Bishop  of  Moulins,  the  Archbishop  of  Avignon,  and 
many  others.     Tor  it  is  to  be  feared  that  the  majority  of  the  French 
clergy  are  more  disposed  than  they  have  ever  been  before  to  sacrifice 
those  principles  of  their  national  Church  which  were  asserted  by  Bos- 
suet  in  the  celebrated  articles  of  1G82,  and  maintained  without  com- 
promise in  all  the  more  glorious  epochs  of  French  history.     The 
Bishops  of  Montpelier,  of  Evereux,  and,  perhaps,  of  Orleans,  are 
considered  at  this  time  the  only  true  Galilean  prelates  of  the  French 
Church,  though  the  Archbishops  of  Besan9on  and  Paris  incline  in  the 
same  direction.     But  the  sound  principles  of  French  ecclesiastical 
independence  find   their  ablest  representatives  in  the  magistrature, 
and  M.  Dupin  has  lately  resumed  his  pen  to  defend  those  traditions 
which  he  has  already  asserted   under  so  many  different  forms   of 
government.     Louis    Napoleon  has  hitherto  seemed  to  favour  the 
Ultramontane  doctrines,  but  this  policy  was  dictated  chiefly  by  his 
desire  to  get  the  Pope  to  Paris;  and  as  that  hope  fades  away,  the 
Moniteiir  has  been  instructed  to  contradict  the  intention  attributed  to 
the  government  for  a  change  in  the  law  of  civil  marriage,  in  terms 
which  will  be  bitterly  resented  by  the  High  Church  party." 

Philip  IV.  of  Spain,  A.  D.  1633,  called  a  general  assembly  of  all 
the  estates  of  the  kingdom  of  Castile  to  consider  and  take  means  to 
remedy  the  grievances  to  which  that  people  were  subjected  by  -their 
connection  with  the  See  of  Rome.  The  assembly  met  and  drew  up  a 
memorial,  consisting  of  ten  articles,  in  which  they  allege  the  same 
abuses,  innovations  and  extortions  that  had  been  inflicted  on  the 
people  of  England.  Among  other  scandalous  abuses,  they  complain 
of  the  extortions  of  the  Roman  Court  in  the  case  of  dispensations  ;  that 
a  great  price  supplied  the  want  of  a  good  cause  ;  and  that  for  a  matri- 
monial dispensation  under  the  second  degree,  they  took  of  great  per- 
sons 8,000,  or  12,000,  or  14,000  ducats.  They  complain  that  the 
Pope  took  .upon  him  to  dispose  of  all  the  rights  of  all  ecclesiastical 
persons,  and  that  he  preferred  not  their  bishops  to  enjoy  their  own 
patronage  and  jurisdiction  ;  and  they  tell  the  Pope  (Urban  VIII.)  \n 
the  words  of  Bernard,  that  the  Roman  Church  was  the  mother  of 


136 

other  churches,  but  not  their  lady  or  mistress  ;  and  that  he  himself 
was  not  the  lord  or  master  of  other  bishops,  but  one  of  them. 

"  They  complained  that  the  Pope  did  challenge  and  usurp  to  him- 
self, as  his  own,  at  their  deaths,  all  clergymen's  estates,  that  were 
gained  or  vested  out  of  the  revenue  of  the  Church  ;  that  a  rich  clergy- 
man could  no  sooner  fall  sick,  but  the  Pope's  collectors  were  gaping 
about  him  for  his  goods,  and  guards  set  presently  about  his  house; 
that  by  this  means  bishops  have  been  deserted  on  their  death-beds, 
and  famished  for  want  of  meat  to  eat ;  that  they  had  not  had,  before 
they  were  dead,  a  cup  left  to  drink  in,  nor  so  much  as  a  candlestick 
of  all  their  goods  (it  is  their  own  expression);  that  by  this  means 
creditors  were  defrauded,  processes  in  law  were  multiplied,  and  great 
estates  wasted  to  nothing. 

"  They  complained  that  the  Popes  did  usurp  as  their  own  all  the 
revenues  of  bishoprics  during  their  vacancies,  sometimes  for  divers 
years  together,  all  which  time  the  churches  were  unrepaired,  the  poor 
unrelieved,  not  so  much  as  one  alms  given,  and  the  wealth  of  Spain 
exported  into  a  foreign  land,  which  was  richer  than  itself  They  wish 
the  Pope  to  take  it  as  an  argument  of  their  respect  to  the  See  of 
Eome,  that  they  do  not  go  about  forthwith  to  reform  these  abuses  by 
their  own  authority,  in  imitation  of  other  provinces." 

Instead,  however,  of  taking  this  decisive  step,  Spain  accepted  some 
concessions,  and  remained  under  what  they  called  "  a  most  grievous 
yoke;"  and  what  advantage  has  Spain  since  reaped  by  its  submis- 
sion? England  did  that  which  Spain  only  asserted  its  right  to  do, 
renounced  the  papal  jurisdiction,  and  reformed  abuses  by  its  own 
authority  ;  and  "by  means  of  this  alteration  of  religion,"  says  Cam- 
den, (Eliz.  p.  31,)  "  England  (as  the  politicians  have  observed)  became 
of  all  the  kingdoms  of  Christendom  the  most  free,  the  sceptre,  as  it 
were,  manumitted  from  the  foreign  servitude  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome ; 
and  more  wealthy  than  in  former  ages,  an  infinite  mass  of  money 
being  stayed  at  home  which  was  wont  to  be  exported  daily  to 
Rome  (the  commonwealth  being  incredibly  exhausted  thereby)  for 
first-fruits,  pardons,  appeals,  dispensations,  palls,  and  other  such  like." 

Sicily  was  another  instance  of  an  open  rupture  with  the  See  of 
Rome  for  grievances  of  the  same  sort.  "  Upon  pretence  of  apostoli- 
cal authority,"  says  Baronius,  the  Roman  historian,  "a  grievous 
offence  is  committed  against  the  Apostolic  See. . .  .the  power  where- 
of is  weakened  in  the  kingdom  of  Sicily,  the  authority  thereof  abro- 
gated, the  jurisdiction  wronged,  the  ecclesiastical  laws  violated,  and 
the  rights  of  the  Church  dissipated."     But  cardinal  though  he  were, 


137 

the  king  (Philip  III.  of  Spain)  for  this  and  like  passages,  ordered  his 
books  to  be  publicly  burned. 

Portugal,  too,  has  had  the  same  struggle.  The  "  Lusitanias 
Gemitus,"  or  "  Groans  of  Portugal,"  tells  us  that  the  Portuguese 
claimed,  as  among  their  ancient  customs  and  essential  rights  of  the 
crown,  (and  the  rights  of  a  crown  in  a  monarchy  are  the  rights  of  the 
people  in  a  republic,)  the  nomination  of  their  own  bishops,  without 
which  condition  they  tell  the  Pope  plainly  (this  was  in  the  17th 
century)  that  they  neither  can  nor  ought  to  receive  them.  And  alter 
a  full  statement  of  grievances,  and  of  the  affronts  and  repulses  they 
had  met  in  seeking  redress  at  Rome,  they  remind  the  Pope  that  Por- 
tugal, and  all  the  provinces  that  belong  to  it  in  Europe,  Asia,  Africa, 
and  America,  "  is  more  than  one  single  sheep,"  and  that  "  St.  Peter's 
ship,  which  hath  been  often  in  danger  in  a  calm  sea,  ought  not  to 
be  opposed  to  the  violent  course  of  just  complainers." 

We  find  the  States  of  Portugal  also,  during  these  contests,  submit- 
ting several  questions,  touching  the  relation  of  the  Church  of  Portugal 
wnth  the  Pope  of  Pvome,  to  'the  University  of  Lisbon ;  and  among 
them  the  following :  whether  in  case  there  were  no  recourse  to  the 
Pope,  the  king  of  Portugal  might  permit  the  consecration  of  bishops 
without  the  Pope  in  his  kingdom?  to  which  the  university  answered 
in  the  affirmative,  giving  this  reason  for  its  decision,  that  "episco- 
pacy was  of  divine  right,  but  the  reservation  of  the  Pope's  approba- 
tion was  of  human  right,  which  doth  not  bind  in  extreme  nor  in  very 
great  necessity." 

But  the  country  of  Europe  which  followed  most  nearly  in  the 
steps  of  England  w^is  Venice,  in  the  17th  century.  That  republic 
had  made  several  laws ;  as  first,  that  no  ecclesiastical  person  should 
lay  claim  to  a  certain  description  of  lands  possessed  by  the  laity  ; 
that  no  person  within  their  dominion  should  found  any  Church, 
monastery,  hospital,  or  other  religious  house,  without  the  Special 
license  of  the  State,  upon  pain  of  imprisonment  and  banishment,  and 
confiscation  of  the  soil  and  buildings  ;  that  none  of  their  subjects 
should  alienate  any  lands  to  the  Church  or  in  favor  of  any  ecclesiasti- 
cal persons,  without  the  special  license  of  the  Senate ;  they  had,  more- 
over, imprisoned  certain  ecclesiastical  persons  for  crimes  of  which  they 
had  been  convicted.  The  Pope  (PaulV.)  commanded  the  Venetians 
to  abrogate  these  laws  and  set  their  prisoners  at  liberty  ;  threatening 
them  if  they  disobeyed  with  an  interdict  and  excommunication,  and  the 
forfeiture  of  goods  held  of  the  Church,  and  ei-yoined  the  ecclesiastics 
to  publish  his  Bull  and  suspend  divine  offices. 


138 

But  the  Venetians  stood  their  ground ;  they  protested  publicly 
against  the  Pope's  Bull;  commanded  the  clergy  to  celebrate  divine 
offices  daily  in  spite  of  the  Pope's  interdict ;  banished  from  their 
city  the  few  who  disobeyed  ;  and  caused  works  to  be  written  and 
published  against  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Roman  Court;  some  of 
which  were  condemned  by  the  Inquisition,  and  forbidden  to  be  read 
under  pain  of  excommunication.*  And  though  at  length,  through  the 
mediation  of  other  parties,  the  dispute  was  settled,  yet  the  Venetians 
refused  to  abrogate  their  laws  ;  nay,  "  they  refused  (though  the  Pope 
did  press  it  most  instantly,  and  the  Cardinal  Joyeuse  did  assure  them 
that  it  would  be  more  acceptable  to  his  holiness  than  the  conquest  of 
a  kingdom)  to  readmit  the  banished  persons  into  their  city.  They 
refused  to  take  an  absolution  from  Rome;  yea,  they  were  so  far  from 
it,  that,  when  the  ambassador  intreated  that  the  duke  might  receive 
a  benediction  from  him  publicly  in  the  Church,  both  the  Duke  and 
Senate  did  resolutely  oppose  it,  because  it  had  some  appearance  of  an 
absolution. "j- 

As  long  as  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope  is  acknowledged,  and  the 
churches  of  various  countries,  instead  of  managing  their  o\Vn  affairs  at 
home,  look  to  a  foreign  jurisdiction  for  the  appointment  of  their 
officers,  and  the  ultimate  hearing  of  appeals  and  determination  of 
causes,  it  is  to  be  expected  that  collisions  of  this  sort  will  occur;  and 
as  almost  every  Catholic  Church  in  Europe  has  felt  the  evil,  and  come 
at  one  time  or  another  very  near  to  the  remedy,  so  we  may  reason- 
ably expect  that  some  of  them  will  yet  acknowledge  and  apply  that 
remedy ;  assert  their  perfect  right  and  ultimate  authority  to  redress 
grievances  and  reform  abuses  ;  and  follow  the  example  of  the  Catholic 
Church  of  England,  in  the  imperishable  declaration  that  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  should  be  reduced  within  his  just  limits,  and  have  no  juris- 
diction beyond  what  the  canons  of  the  Universal  Cliurch  have  assign- 
ed him. 

It  is  evident  from  these  movements  that  there  is  nothing  in  the 
constitution  of  the  Catholic  Church  to  restrain  the  bishops  of  any 

*  Very  remarkable  are  the  words  of  Bellarmine,  one  of  the  most  moderate  of 
the  papal  party  in  this  dispute  :  "  That  to  restrain  obedience  due  to  the  Pope 
unto  matters  appertaining  only  to  the  soul  was  to  reduce  it  to  nothing  ;  that  St. 
Paul  appealed  unto  Caesar,  who  was  not  his  judge,  and  not  to  St.  Peter,  was 
because  he  would  not  make  himself  in  those  days  ridiculous.  That  the  ancient 
Popes  professed  subjection  to  the  Emperors,  was  to  comply  with  the  humour  and 
affection  of  those  times.".  See  Rycaut's  continuation  of  Platina,  life  of  Paul  V. 
who  gives  a  synopsis  of  the  arguments  on  both  sides. 

t  See  Bramhairs  Just  Vindication,  Part  I.  c.  7. 


139 

country,  acting  in  concert  with  their  clergy  and  laity,  from  asserting 
the  true  rights  and  liberties  of  the  Church,  and  effecting  the  reforma- 
tion of  those  notorious  abuses  which  it  has  long  been  the  interest 
and  policy  of  the  Roman  See  to  perpetuate.  A  general  movement 
of  this  nature,  without  disturbing  the  existing  relations  of  archbishops, 
metropolitans,  and  patriarchs,  but  regarding  them  as  human  appoint- 
ments for  the  preservation  of  order,  and  as  responsible  to  the  Church 
in  its  divinely  constituted  character  of  the  perpetual  witness  and 
guardian  of  heavenly  truth,  and  the  dispenser  of  the  faith  and 
sacram_ents  of  Christ,  would  carry  us  back  to  the  ancient  basis  of 
co-ordinate  communion ;  the  true  and  safe  channel,  marked  out  on 
the  chart  of  divine  inspiration,  between  the  Scylla  and  Charybdis  of 
Papal  tyranny  and  infidel  anarchy. 

Of  the  necessity  of  such  a  reformation  on  the  part  of  the  numerous 
Catholic  Churches  in  communion  with  the  See  of  Rome,  and  of  the 
immense  benefits  that  would  result  from  it,  no  question  can  be  made, 
except  by  those  whose  reason  is  warped  by  interest,  or  buried  in  the 
clouds  of  prejudice  and  passion.  That  reasonable  men  may  be  firmly 
convinced  that  the  evils  of  the  present  Roman  system  are  less  than 
those  which  would  be  consequent  on  a  change,  or  an  attempt  at  refor- 
mation, is  probable  enough;  but,  apart  from  this  consideration,  who 
can  deny  that  it  is  simply  better  to  have  the  divine  offices  of  the 
Church  celebrated  (agreeably  to  the  ninth  canon  of  the  fourth  council 
of  Lateran*)  in  a  living  than  a  dead  language  ]  to  expunge  myths 
and  fables  from  the  holy  services  of  the  Church  than  to  retain  them  ? 
to  direct  the  religious  worship  of  Christ's  faithful  people  exclusively 
to  the  blessed  and  adorable  Trinity,  than  to  expose  them  to  manifest 
peril  of  idolatry,  and  to  accustom  them  to  usages  of  which,  it  may 
be  safely  said,  without  attempting  to  settle  the  formal  notion  of 
idolatry,  that  they  cannot  be  distinguished  from  the  idolatrous  rites 
of  ancient  Greece  and  Rome  "?  to  inculcate  simply,  and  without  quali- 
fication, honor  and  obedience  to  the  civil  authority,  and  to  spiritual 
pastors  chosen  and  appointed  in  the  country  of  one's  birth,  and 
responsible  only  to  the  Church  and  government  of  that  country,  than 

*  The  fourth  council  of  Lateran  was  held  A.  D.  1215,  and  the  canon  referred 
to,  and  which  requires  the  Divine  Offices  to  be  administered  in  a  language  un- 
derstood by  the  people,  reads  as  follows : 

"  Becau3«  in  most  parts  there  are  within  the  same  state  or  dioce.=e  people  of 
different  languages  mixed  together,  having  under  one  faith  various  rites  and 
customs  ;  we  distinctly  charge  that  the  bishops  of  these  states  or  dioceses  provide 
proper  persons  to  celebrate  the  divine  offices,  and  administer  the  sacraments  of 
the  Church,  according  to  the  differences  of  rites  and  languages,  instructing  them 
both  by  word  and  example." 


140 

to  entwine  the  thoughts  and  afFections  of  men  around  the  government 
and  mstitutions  of  a  foreign  land? 

That  these  and  many  like  abuses  will  eventually  awaken  a  sober 
and  resolute  spirit  of  reform  in  the  heart  of  some  or  all  of  the 
Catholic  churches  iiow  in  communion  with  the  See  of  Rome,  can 
hardly  be  doubted. 

Of  the  temper  of  the  Catholic  churches  in  Europe,  at  the  present 
day,  and  of  their  suppressed  hatred  of  the  subtle  and  intensely 
selfish  policy  of  the  Roman  Court,  a  remarkable  proof  has  been  lately 
furnished  in  the  woik  of  Dr.  Hirscher,  Dean  of  the  Metropolitan 
Church  in  Freiburg,  Breisgau,  and  Professor  of  Theology  .in  the 
Roman  Catholic  University  of  that  city  ;  a  work  which  distinctly 
advocates  reforms  similar  to  those  made  in  England  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  and  which  has  gone  rapidly  through  three  editions  in  Ger- 
many, and  been  translated  into  French,  with  strong  commendations,  by 
a  Belgian  layman.  This  interesting  and  significant  treatise  has  been 
translated  into  English  by  the  Rev.  A.  Cleveland  Coxe,  of  Hartford, 
who  has  prefixed  to  it  an  introduction  of  his  own,  from  which  I  make 
the  following  extract : 

"  But  while  the  Galilean  Church,  as  no  longer  Gallican,  but  existing, 
as  Hirscher  testifies,  outside  the  nation,*  in  its  ecclesiastics  only,  has 
undoubtedly  become  thoroughly  ultramontane,  it  cannot  be  doubted 
that  a  widely  diffused  leaven  of  Hirscherism,  if  T  may  be  pardoned 
the  woi'd,  is  at  work  throughout  Europe.  What  Robertson  chooses 
to  call  Febronianism,\  as  if  it  were  the  mere  remainder  of  the  last 
century's  work,  and  of  the  Synod  of  Ems,  is  still,  by  his  own  confes- 
sion, alive  in  Austria.  Indeed,  if  report  says  true,  the  bishops  of 
Austria  have  been  on  the  eve  of  dissolving  with  the  Pope,  and  estab- 
lishing their  own  patriarchal  independence,  during  the  present  ponti- 
ficate.J  But  this  movement  is  not  Febronianism,  it  is  not  Hirscher- 
ism, it  is  a  general,  an  earnest,  and  a  holy  action  of  the  better  class 
of  minds  throughout  the  Roman  churches,  resulting  from  the  revived 
study  of  the  primitive  fathers,  the  decay  of  the  papal  power,  and  the 
monstrous  attempt  to  make  an  article  of  faith  of  the  blasphemous 
fable  of  the  immaculate  conception  !§     Like  all  movements  in  the 

*  See  also  De  L'Etat  et  des  besoiiis  Religieux  at  Moraux  des  populations  et 
France:  par  M.  L'Abbe  J.  Bonnttat.  Paris,  1845.  For  au  extract,  see  Black- 
wood, May,  1849. 

+  In  his  introduction  to  Moehler's  Symbolism. 

t  ^ee  Blackwood,  June,  1848. 

<J  Hirscher,  iu  his  Antworl,  while  he  quotes  St.  Bernard's  famous  letter  on  this 
subject,  with  evident  willingness  to  attack  the  figment,  only  cites  it  professedly, 
to  justify  his  own  bold  remonstrances.  A  translation  of  this  letter  was  contri- 
buted by  the  writer  lo  the  (American)  Church  Review,  July,  1849.  A  quotation 
from  Demouliu,  on  the  same  subject,  will  be  found  in  the  present  work. 


HI 

Church,  of  which  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  author,  it  appears  to  be  un- 
concerted  and  universal.  The  Church  of  England  is  only  sharing 
with  all  Christendom  its  mighty  action  and  its  feeble  reaction.  The 
latter  is  numbering  its  victims  here  and  there,  but  the  former  is 
sublimely  and  steadily  making  head  towards  the  thorough  resuscita- 
tion of  the  Church,  and  to  the  propagation  of  the  faith  throughout  the 
British  Empire. 

"  The  movement  of  Nuytz,  in  Piedmont,  has  attracted  some  atten- 
tion, as  being  Italian  ;  but  it  cannot  be  doubted,  that  if  all  Italy  Avere 
as  free  as  Sardinia,  similar  developments  would  be  seen  everywhere. 
No  reference  is  intended  here  to  the  politico-religious  and  democratic 
spirit  of  the  new  Italian  tribunes,  although  the  popular  sympathy 
with  them,  and  the  universal  hatred  of  the  Church  and  its  clergy,*  is 
a  dreadful  proof  of  Hirscher's  general  statements.  There  is  a  better 
and  a  deeper  spirit,  like  that  of  our  author,  working  in  the  hearts  and 
minds  of  many.  Amongst  many  similar  publications,  the  writer 
found  at  Turin  a  work  addressed  '  To  the  conscience  of  Pius  the 
Ninth,'!  by  a  devout  Romanist,  in  which  the  pontiff  is  besought  to 
imitate  the  first  bishops  of  Rome  ;  to  divest  himself  of  sovereignty, 
and  to  become  a  bishop  indeed  ;  and  in  which  the  matter  of  lay- 
rights  and  diocesan-synods  is  discussed  as  by  our  author,  and  with 
the  citation  of  the  same  primitive  authorities. J  In  the  same  spirit 
writes  Bordas  Demoulin,  in  France  ;§  and  the  late  mandement  of  the 


*  In  Turin  and  Genoa,  the  Pope  and  the  clergy  are  the  subjects  of  innumerable 
caricatures  and  pasquinades,  which  are  openly  displayed  in  the  public  streets. 
Addio  al  Papa  is  tlie  litle  of  a  red-hot  Protestant  publication,  which  looks 
strangely  on  large  placards,  about  the  Capital  of  Sardinia,  staring  a  population  of 
professed  papists  in  the  face. 

t  The  temporal  power  of  the  Pope  is  most  eloquently  attacked  in  this  work, 
and  the  primitive  idea  of  a  biiihop  forcibly  presented  in  contrast.  Take  the  fol- 
lowing noble  passage  :  "  Ma  il  fatto  sta  che  non  hanno  luogo  prescrizioni ;  e  la 
chiesa  co'  gemiti  de  suoi  santi,  I'uminita  con  gli  scritti  de'  suoi  difensori,  i  popoli 
con  isgomentevoli  clamorio  con  silenzio  pui  isgomentevole  ancora,  con  querele  e 
preghiere,  con  lacrime  e  con  sangue  hanno  le  mille  volte  protestato.  Protestare! 
Questa  voce  ricorda  la  terribile  testimonianza  di  Bossuet,  confessante  che  I'odio  del 
potere  temporale  fu  quello  che  in  Alamagna  spiar.6  le  vie  alia  Riforma,  e  che  per 
conseguenza  dall'  una  e  dail'  altra  parte  rese  piu  gravi  le  sciagure."  As  to  the 
special  plea,  that  the  temporal  power  is  requisite  to  the  independence  of  the  pon- 
tiff, he  answers,  in  a  strain  of  irony  not  usual  with  him:  "  So,  then,  Gregory  XVI. 
was  more  independent  than  St.  Paul,  and  Pius  I.  led  to  martyrdom  a  poor  slave, 
compared   with  Clement  VII.  waiting  upon  Charles  V  !     If  so,  the  Popes  must 

reign  by  the  grace  of Paixhan  guns,  and  the  symbol  of  the  Dove  should  give 

place  to  a  bombshell."  In  this  last  there  is  more  truth  than  poetry,  as  one  may 
see,  at  Rome  ;  where  there  are  many  recent  ruins,  as  well  as  ancient  ones,  by 
virtue  of  which  Pius  IX.  still  sits  in  the  chair  of  St.  Clement.  No  wonder,  then, 
that,  as  this  writer  further  testifies,  "  il  nome  di  chierico  e  abovito  e  vituperate 
negli  stati  papali." 

\  Roma  e  il  Mondo,  di  N.  Tommaseo.  Turin,  1851.  A  work  which  is,  in 
some  respects,  as  interesting  as  Hirscher's. 

§  Lettre  a  M.  L*Archeveque  de  Paris,  sur  son  raandemeut  contre  les  droits  des 
laiques  et  des  prefres  dans  D'Eglise,  par  Bordas  Demoulin.  This  writer  is  also 
author  of  many  other  works. 


142 

Archbishop  of  Paris  has  called  out  other  writers  in  a  similar  vein  ;* 
showing  that  St.  Bernard  and  St.  Louisf  have  yet  their  representa- 
tives in  that  unhappy  country,  to  which  poor  Bossuet  ventured  to  call 
attention,  as  so  fortunate  in  saving  herself  from  revolutions  by  reject- 
ing reformation  !  The  immediate  translation  of  Hirscher  into  French,^ 
with  comments  of  his  own,  by  Adolphe  Stappaerts,  a  layman  of  Ant- 
werp, must  also  be  mentioned  ;  and,  as  further  indicative  of  a  general 
movement,  the  writer  may  mention,  that  under  the  Damnatio,  affixed 
to  the  gates  of  the  Quirinal  and  Vatican,  he  saw  last  autumn,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  works  of  Nuytz,§  and  others  of  a  similar  character,!  the 
title  of  a  Spanish  treatise,^  apparently  reviving  the  position  talicn  by 
the  Spanish  doctors  at  the  Council  of  Trent. 

"  Hirscher  must  be  regarded,  therefore,  as  the  foremost  in  a  general 
and  spontaneous  movement  throughout  the  Eoman  communion,  which 
the  Pope  will  hardly  be  able  to  overcome  in  his  present  decayed  and 
impotent  position."** 

To  these  intelligent  observations  of  Mr.  Coxe,  I  will  add  the  fol- 
lowing definite  statement  of  Dr.  Hirscher,  of  the  reforms  which  are, 
as  he  tells  us,  extensively  desired  in  Germany,  which  are  now  openly 
contended  for  in  Belgium,  and  an  under  current  in  favor  of  which 
probably  exists  in  every  Church  in  communion  with  the  Church  of 
Rome : 

"  A  third  point  to  wliich  the  Church  must  direct  its  immediate 
attention  is,  the  satisfaction  of  that  general  desire  which  is  prevalent 
for  certain  reforms.  This  desire  is  of  long  standing,  and  very  familiar 
to  us.ff     What  is  wanted  is,  for  example,  an  improvement  in  the 

*  Lettre  a  Monseigneur  L'Arclieveque  de  Paris.  Par  x.x.  In  some  respects, 
this  anonymous  writer,  though  he  writes  in  a  different  tone,  is  superior  to  De- 
mouliu.  .      . 

t  Depuis  le  donzieme  siecle,  L'Europe  travaille  a  s"  emanciper  de  la  domuiation 

sacerdotale  et  papale et  les  premiers  grands  promoteurs  de  I'entreprise 

ont  ete  St.  Bernard  et  Sr.  Louis. — Demouhn. 

\  L'etat  Actuel  de  L'Eglise,  par  S.  B.  Hirscher,  traduit  de  I'  Allemand,  sur  la 
Illme.  edition,  par  Adolphe  Stappaerts.  Anvers,  1851.  To  this  work  the  pre- 
sent writer  is  i)rimarily  indebted  lor  all  he  knows  of  Hirscher,  and  for  much 
assistance  in  making  an  English  translation  from  the  German. 

(J  Juris  Ecclesiastfci  Institutiones,  Joannis  Nepomuceni  Nuytz,  in  Regie  Tauri- 
nensi  Athenteo  professoris.  etc. 

II  iManuale  Cnnpendium  Juris  Canonici,  ad  usnm  Seminariorum,  justa  tempo- 
rum  circumstanUas  accommodatam.     Auctore  J.  F.  M.  Lequeux. 

IT  Defensa  de  la  autoridad  de  los  Gobiernos  y  de  los  Obispos  contra  les  pretea- 
ciones  de  la  Curia  Romana,  por  Francisco  de  Panla,  etc. 

**  So  a  French  Romanist  speaks  of  the  peaceful  regeneration  of  the  Church  as 
a  thins — "  qui  a  eie  tenie,  il  est  vrai,  si  souvent  et  si  vainemeut,  mais  dans  des 
temps  liifferents  des  notres  !  !"     Lettre  de  xx. 

tt  "  So  the  letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Paris,  '  J'exprime  un  vceu,  que  je  crois 
clre  confurme  aavceu  general  .  .  .  .  et  je  pense  encore  q'une  sage  rcforme,  qui 
cette  fois,  au  lieu  de  nous  diviser,  pourrait,  au  contraire,  nous  reunir,  serait  pre- 
ferable a  une  revolution.^ " 


143 

worship  of  the  Church ;  a  revision  of  its  liturgical  formularies  ;  the 
translation  of  the  liturgy  into  the  vulgar  tongue  ;  communion  in  both 
kinds  ;  the  reform  of  the  confessional ;  the  simplification  of  ceremo- 
nies ;  and  such  like  changes.  So,  too,  we  need  an  amelioration  of 
ecclesiastical  discipline  ;  the  abolition  of  the  forced  celibacy  of  priests  ; 
and  the  revision  of  certain  ecclesiastical  observations.  We  need  fur- 
ther improvements,  for  example,  in  the  Table  of  Lessons,  and  a  greater 
variety  in  the  selections  from  the  Gospels  and  Epistles.  "We  need 
emancipation  from  that  tyranny  which  imposes  upon  the  fiiithful, 
as  Catholic  doctrine,  matters  which  have  never  been  settled  by  the 
Church.  Finally,  we  require  reforms  in  the  constitution  of  the 
Church ;  the  revival  of  Synodal  institutions  ;  and  the  proportionate 
participation  of  clergy  and  laity  in  the  aftairs  of  the  Church." — 
Pp.  181,  182. 

The  time  for  such  a  movement  is  in  God's  hand  ;  we  have  only  to 
remain  quietly  in  the  station  in  which  His  providence  has  placed  us, 
and  pray  and  labor  for  the  coming  of  His  kingdom.  To  human  ob- 
servation the  chief  lets  and  hindrances  to  the  desired  Reformation 
appear  to  be  these : 

1.  The  insignificance  and  practical  nullity  of  the  Episcopate  in 
the  Roman  communion. 

Our  Lord  Jescs  Christ  foresaw,  and  did  all  that  was  needful  on 
His  part  to  avert  the  evils  which  have  happened  to  His  Church.  He 
appointed  an  order  of  men  to  succeed  the  apostles  in  the  government 
of  His  Church.  To  these  He  committed  the  care  and  oversight  of 
His  flock.  These  He  made  the  immediate  depositaries  of  His  author- 
ity, that  they  might  be  directly  accountable  to  Him  for  its  exercise. 
The  supervision  or  episcopate,  thus  divinely  instituted,  was,  in  the 
memorable  words  of  St.  Cyprian,  single ;  was  one,  of  which  each 
bishop  held  his  part,  with  the  privilege  and  duty  of  being  interested 
in  the  whole.  The  partners  in  this  episcopacy  were  the  Popes  or 
Fathers  of  the  Church,  and  the  Vicars  of  Christ.*  In  the  churches 
of  the  Roman  communion,  this  divine  provision  of  Jesus  Christ,  for 

*  The  title  vicarius  Christi  (vicar  of  Christ)  was  in  the  early  Church  given  to 
all  bishops.  The  author  of  the  Commentary  on  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  contained  in 
the  works  of  St.  Ambrose,  says,  at  v.  10,  cb.  xi.,  1  Cor. :  "  Episcopiis  habet  per- 
sonam Christi.  Quasi  ergo  ante  judicem,  sic  ante  episcopum,  quia  vicarius  Do. 
mini  est." 

So  St.  Cyprian,  in  his  59th  Epistle  (Feli'sedition)  to  Cornelius,  Bishop  of  Rome  : 
"  Neque  enim  aliunde  haereses  abortae  sunt,  aut  nata  sunt  schismata  quam  iude 
quod  sacerdos  Dei  non  obtemperatur,  uec  unus  in  Ecclesia  ad  tempus  sacerdos, 
et  ad  tempus  judex  vice  ChrisH  cogitatur,"  (p.  261.)  Again  to  Horentius,  (Ep. 
66,  p.  285) :  "  Christi,  qui  dicit  ad  Apostolos,  ac  per  hoc  ad  omues  prtepositos, 


144 

the  protection  and  comfort  of  His  Church,  has  been  for  several  hun- 
dred years  subverted.  The  bishops  of  that  Church  are  bishops  only 
in  name.  The  deep  and  awful  consciousness  of  a  power  of  super- 
vision entrusted  to  them  immediately  by  Christ,  and  for  which  they  are 
directbj  responsible  to  him,  they  have  not,  and  in  their  present  posi- 
tion cannot  have.  On  their  present  system,  the  followers  of  Christ 
how  numerous  soever  and  how  widely  soever  dispersed,  have  but  one 
true  bishop,  one  Pope,  one  vicar  of  Christ.  Both  the  titles  and  the  au- 
thority which  they  express,  which  were  once  diffused  among  all  bishops, 
are  now  concentrated  in  one.  That  one  has  all  episcopal  jurisdiction 
at  his  disposal.  From  him,  and  not  from  Christ  by  means  of  their 
consecration,  must  other  bishops  receive  such  degrees  and  measures 
of  jurisdiction  as  he  may  see  fit  to  bestow.  He  may  parcel  it  out  as 
he  pleases  ;  give  it  to  deacons  and  presbyters,  and,  under  the  name 
of  Cardinals,  set  them  over  all  the  bishops  upon  earth  ;  and  limit  it 
or  revol%e  it  from  bishops  at  his  will.  Thus  the  institution  of  Christ, 
for  the  propagation  of  His  gospel  and  the  purity  of  His  Church,  is 
abolished.  He  provided  that  there  should  be  in  every  country  an 
order  of  men  to  represent  His  person,  and  to  govern  the  Church  on 
their  responsibility  to  Him  ;  whereas  the  Roman  system,  in  the  very 
teeth  of  Christ's  ordinance,  provides  that  there  shall  be  no  such  per- 
sons in  any  country  on  earth,  but  that  they,  in  every  country,  who 
ought  to  fill  this  oflSce,  shall  take  their  authority  from  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  and  account  to  him  for  its  exercfse.  Instead  of  being  the 
direct  representatives  of  Christ,  the  bishops  of  churches  in  communion 

qui  Apostolis  vicaria  ordinalione  succedunt,  qui  audit  vos,  me  audit,  et  qui  me 
audit,  audit  eum  qui  me  misit. 

Ancieutly  the  title  Papa  (Pope)  was  given  to  every  Bisiiop.  The  Presbyters 
and  deacons  thus  address  their  letter  to  St.  Cyprian,  (Ep.  30,)  Cypriano  Pap(Z, 
and  at  the  close  they  style  him,  "bealissime  et  gloriosissime  Papa."  In  the  eighth 
epistle  written  to  the  clergy  of  Carthage  daring  his  absence,  they  speak  of  him 
as -the  blessed  Pope  Cyprian— "  benedictum  Papam."  St.  Jerome  frequently 
gives  the  same  title  to  St.  Augustin,  (Ep.  39,  68,  72,  &.c,  Migne's  ed.  of  St.  Aug. 
Works.)  and  also  to  Theophilus,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  (St.  Jerome's  Works, 
Ep.  99  ed.  Migne.)  St.  Augustin  addresses  Anrelius,  a  brother  bishop,  in  the 
same  style.  (Opera  Ep.  41  and  60.)  Rigaltius,  (a  Romanist,)  in  a  note  on  the 
eighth  epistle  in  St.  Cyprian's  works  above  mentioned,  observes,  that  "  then  the 
Roman  Poutitf  had  titles  in  common  with  most  bishops  of  other  cities  ;  but  that  at 
last  Gre-'ory  VII.,  in  a  Roman  Synod,  ordained  that  the  name  of  Pope  should 
belong  to  one  alone  in  Christendom."  It  might  be  shown,  in  like  manner,  that 
the  titles  of  Summu$  Sacerdos,  P-ontifex  Maximus,  and  Princeps  Sacerdotum, 
were  anciently  applied  to  all  bishops.  Pseudo-Ambros,  Com.  in  Ephes  IV.,  v. 
1    and  12  ;  St.  Jerome  Ep.  ad  Asellam,  (No.  45  Migne.) 


145 

with  Rome  are  the  mere  factors,  dependents,  or  vassals  of  the  Roman 
see.  If  any  man  doubt  this,  let  him  read  their  oath  of  office ;  an 
oath  which  it  is  matter  of  astonishment  that  any  mortal  should  either 
make  to  another,  or  suffer  to  be  made  to  himself: 

"1,  N.,  elect  of  the  Church  of  N.,  from  henceforward  \v\l\  be  faith- 
ful and  obedient  to  St.  Peter  the  Apostle,  and  to  the  holy  Roman 
Church,  and  to  our  lord,  the  lord  N.  Pope  N.  and  to  his  successors, 
canonically  coming  in.  I  will  neither  advise,  consent,  or  do  any 
thing  that  they  may  lose  life  or  member,  or  that  their  persons  may 
be  seized,  or  hands  anywise  laid  upon  them,  or  any  injuries  offered 
to  them,  under  any  pretence  whatsoever.  The  counsel  which  they 
shall  intrust  me  withal,  by  themselves,  their  messengers,  or  letters,  I 
will  not  knowingly  reveal  to  any  to  their  prejudice.  1  will  help  them 
to  defend  and  keep  the  Roman  papacy,  and  the  royalties  of  St.  Peter, 
saving  my  order,  against  all  men.  The  legate  of  the  Apostolic  See, 
going  and  coming,  1  will  honourably  treat  and  help  in  his  necessities.. 
The  rights,  honors,  privileges,  and  authority  of  the  holy  Roman 
Church,  of  our  lord  the  Pope,  and  his  aforesaid  successors,  I  will  en- 
deavour to  preserve,  defend,  increase,  and  advance.  I  will  not  be  in 
any  counsel,  action,  or  treaty,  in  vrhich  shall  be  plotted  against  our 
said  lord,  and  the  said  Roman  Church,  any  thing  to  the  hurt  or  pre- 
judice of  their  persons,  right,  honour,  state,  or  power ;  and  if  I  shall 
know  any  such  thing  to  be  treated  or  agitated  by  any  whatsoever,  I 
will  hinder  it  to  my  power ;  and  as  soon  as  I  can,  will  signify  it  to 
our  said  lord,  or  to  some  other,  by  whom  it  may  come  to  his  know- 
ledge. The  rules  of  the  holy  Fathers,  the  apostolic  decrees,  ordi- 
nances, or  disposals,  reservations,  provisions,  and  mandates,  I  will 
observe  with  all  my  might,  and  cause  to  be  observed  by  others. 
Heretics,  schismatics,  and  rebels  to  our  said  lord,  or  his  foresaid  suc- 
cessors, I  will  to  my  power  persecute  and  oppose.  I  will  come  to  a 
council  when  I  am  called,  unless  I  be  hindered  by  a  canonical  Impe- 
diment. I  will  by  myself  in  person  visit  the  threshold  of  the  apostles 
every  three  years ;  and  give  an  account  to  our  lord  and  his  foresaid 
successors  of  all  my  pastoral  office,  and  of  all  things  anywise  belong- 
ing to  the  state  of  my  Church,  to  the  discipline  of  my  clergy  and 
people,  and  lastly  to  the  salvation  of  souls  committed  to  my  trust ; 
and  will  in  like  manner  humbly  receive  and  diligently  execute  the 
apostolic  commands.  And  if  I  be  detained  by  a  lawful  impediment, 
I  will  perform  all  the  things  aforesaid  by  a  certain  messenger  hereto 
specially  impowered,  a  member  of  my  chapter,  or  some  other  in 
ecclesiastical  dignity,  or  else  having  a  parsonage;  or  in  default  of 
these,  by  a  priest  of  the  diocese  ;  or  in  default  of  one  of  the  clergy, 
[of  the  diocese]  by  some  other  secular  or  regular  priest  of  approved 
integrity  and  religion,  fully  instructed  in  all  things  above-mentioned. 
And  such  impediment  I  will  make  out  by  lawful  proofs  to  be  trans- 
mitted  by  the  foresaid  messenger  to  the  cardinal  proponent  of  the 
holy  Roman  Church  in  the  congregation  of  the  sacred  coundl.  The 
possessions  belonging  to  my  table  1  will  neither  sell,  nor  give  away, 

10 


146 

nor  mortgage,  nor  grant  anew  in  fee,  nor  anywise  alienate,  no,  not 
even  with  the  consent  of  the  chapter  of  my  Church,  without  consult- 
ing the  Roman  Pontiff.  And  if  I  shall  make  any  alienation,  I  will 
thereby  incur  the  penalties  contained  in  a  certain  constitution  put 
forth  about  this  matter.  So  help  me  God  and  these  holy  Gospels  of 
God." 

Thus  the  appointed  guardians  and  governors  of  the  Church  of 
Christ  have  betrayed  their  trust,  and  sold  themselves  to  the  Court  of 
Rome  to  be  the  tools  of  a  worldly  policy.  It  is  impossible  that  reli- 
gious or  civil  liberty  should  flourish  in  any  country  in  which  this 
system  prevails,  or  that  abuses,  corruptions,  and  superstitions,  should 
be  eradicated,  while  the  maintenance  of  them  subserves  the  interest 
of  the  Roman  Court.  It  was  by  this  means  that  the  Popes  of  Rome 
were  enabled  to  defeat  the  movement  for  reformation  in  the  sixteenth 
century  ;  openly  opposing  it  as  long  as  they  could  ;  yielding  at 
length  from  necessity  to  the  call  for  a  general  council ;  and  then 
managing,  by  means  of  their  Italian  bishops,  many,  if  not  most  of 
them,  mere  titulars,  to  put  down  by  a  vote  of  almost  three  to  one 
whatever  reforms  the  French  and  Spanish  diocesans  honestly  but 
timidly  proposed.  Thus  the  roots  of  all  abuses  were  left ;  only  the 
tops  for  appearance  sake  were  lopped  off;  and  the  Reformation  on 
the  Continent,  which  should  have  been  promoted  on  principle  and 
with  sobriety  within  the  Church,  was  brought  into  contempt  by  being 
turned  over  to  the  Protestants,  to  be  pursued  with  passion  and  blind 
zeal  without  the  Church. 

2.  This  obstacle  is  the  greater  from  the  fact  that  the  theology ' 
commonly  taught  in  the  churches  in  communion  with  the  See  of 
Rome,  has  been  skilfully  contrived  and  adapted  to  the  very  purpose 
of  elevating  the  papacy  by  depressing  the  episcopacy.  Before  the 
reformation,  the  canonists  and  the  schoolmen  wrought  together  for 
the  elevation  of  the  Roman  see.  The  former  carried  matters  to  the 
highest  pitch,  flattering  the  Popes  with  the  conceit,  that  as  the  vice- 
gerents of  Christ,  who  was  the  Lord  of  the  whole  earth,  they  had 
dominion  over  all  nations,  and  could  alone  bestow  a  just  and  valid  title 
to  kings  and  princes  over  the  countries  which  they  governed.  That 
remarkable  work,  "  The  Convocation  Book,  of  A.  D.  1606,"  commonly 
called  Bishop  Overall's  Convocation  Book,  by  its  profound  and  elab- 
orate retutation  of  the  theories  which  the  canonists  had  constructed 
for  concentrating  all  temporal  as  well  as  spiritual  power  in  the  Popes 
of  Rome,  is  a  monument  of  the  hold  which  these  theories  once  had 
over  the  minds  of  the  learned.     The  English  Reformation  has  con- 


147 

signed  this  class  of  writers  to  oblivion.  The  subtleties  of  the  school- 
men, though  less  ambitious,  have  been  more  enduring,  and  are  still 
of  avail  to  divert  the  governing  power  of  the  Church  from  the  epis- 
copacy, where  Christ  placed,  and  where  the  ancient  Church  pre- 
served it,  and  fix  it  in  the  papacy.  The  power  of  creating  the  true 
body  of  Christ,  is  superior  to  the  power  of  governing  the  mystical 
hody^  and  consequently  the  latter  must  be  subordinate  to  the  former. 
Hence  the  common  opinion  in  the  Roman  schools  that  bishop  and 
priest  are  one  order ;  that  ordination  to  the  priesthood,  indeed,  fixes 
a  man  in  an  immutable  station,  and  confers  on  him  an  irrevocable 
power,  (in  technical  language,  imprints  an  indelible  character  ;)  but 
that  consecration  to  the  episcopate  does  nothing  of  the  sort ;  that  it 
raises  the  presbyter  to  no  higher  order  than  he  had  before,  but  merely 
confers  on  him  an  office,  the  powers  of  which  are  mutable  and  revo* 
cable.*  Thus  the  bishops  are  placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  Pope  as 
clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter.  They  are  much  or  nothing,  as  he 
pleases  to  maka  them. 

In  effect,  the  divine  institution  of  episcopacy,  or  the  doctrine  that 
bishops  received  their  power  of  government  immediately  from  Christ 

*  This  fiinciful  doctrine — fanciful  in  its  origin,  though  only  too  practical  in  its 
resnlts — is  thus  clearly  stated  by  a  divine  of  our  Church,  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth, 
Bishop  Downham.  See  more  on  the  same  subject  iu  Dr.  Marshall's  Constitution 
of  the  Church,  A.  D.  1716. 

"  It  is  true  that  some  popish  writers  make  bishops  and  presbyters  but  one 
order;  but  you  must  withal  take  the  reason  of  that  popish  conceit.  They  hold, 
the  sacrament  of  the  altar,  as  they  call  it,  is  the  sacrament  of  sacraments,  where- 
unto  the  sacrament  of  order  is  subordinate,  all  their  orders  of  clerks  being  or- 
dained to  the  ministry  of  the  altar :  And  that  every  one  of  their  several  orders 
(all  which  they  call  sacraments)  is  only  to  be  accounted  a  sacrament,  as  it  hath 
reference  to  the  Eucharist :  To  which  purpose  Thomas  Aquinas  did  somewhat 
ridiculously  distinguish  iheir  several  orders,  {Secunda  Secundce,  q.  44,  and  in  his 
Supplement,  q.  37,  2  c.,)  accordingly  as  their  divers  offices  referred  to  that 
sacrament:  And  inasmuch  as  by  that  whole  power  of  order,  this  is  the  supreme 
act,  by  pronouncing  the  words  of  consecration,  to  make  the  very  body  of  Christ, 
which  is  as  well  performed  by  a  priest  as  by  a  bishop  ;  therefore  they  teach,  that 
the  bishops  and  priests  are  both  of  one  order;  and  that  the  order,  as  it  is  a  sacra- 
ment, is  not  superior  to  that  of  presbyters,  but  only  as  it  is  an  office  in  respect  of 
sacred  actions:  And,  iu  this  sense,  Thomas  says,  that  the  bishop  having  power 
in  sacred  and  hierarchical  actions,  in  respect  of  Christ's  mystical  body,  above  the 
priest,  the  office  of  a  bishop  is  an  order :  For  you  must  understand  that  they 
make  all  ecclesiastical  power  to  have  reference  to  the  body  of  Christ,;  either 
verum,  his  true  body,  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar,  which  they  call  the  power  of 
order;  or  mystkum,  mystical,  (that  is,  the  true  Church,  and  membeps  thereof,) 
which  they  call  the  power  of  jurisdiction." 


148 

by  their  consecration,  has  long  since  been  exploded  from  the  Roman 
schools,  and  is  as  much  decried  by  Romanists  as  it  is  by  Presbyte- 
rians and  Independents,  Indeed,  there  is  scarcely  an  argument  pro- 
duced by  the  latter  against  Episcopacy,  for  fear  it  might  lead  to  the 
papacy,  which  had  not  before  been  used  by  Bellarmine  and  other 
Jesuits  against  the  same  Episcopacy,  for  fear  it  would  subvert  the 
papacy.*  In  the  Council  of  Trent,  the  French  and  Spanish  bishops, 
made  an  honest  effort  for  the  truth,  but  they  were  defeated  by  the 
Italians,  who  well  understood  that  to  acknowledge  the  divine  institu- 
tion of  Episcopacy  would  be  destructive  of  the  papal  supremacy. f 

3.  Another  obstacle  to  reform  is  the  passionate  and  indiscriminate 
way  in  which  the  Church  of  Rome  is  generally  assailed.  Instead  of 
regarding  Popery  as  consisting  of  additions  made  to  the  Catholic  faith 
in  corrupt  and  ignorant  times,  the  origin  and  growth  of  which  are  to  be 
traced  historically  with  a  view  to  their  removal,  the  assailants,  for 
the  most  part,  look  upon  the  abuses  as  logical  developments,  which 
can  be  most  effectually  dealt  with  by  denying  the  principles  from 
which  they  are  supposed  to  flow.  Hence  the  common  opinion  that  the 
Church  of  England  contains  all  the  elements  of  Popery,  only  that  she 
does  not,  like  the  Church  of  Rome,  consistently  act  them  out !  Besides, 
the  assailants,  for  the  most  part,  have  no  idea  of  the  Christian  Faith  as 

*  For  a  comparative  view  of  the  opinions  of  Romanists  and  Presbyterians  on 
this  subject,  with  full  quotations  from  authors  on  both  sides,  see  Bishop  Sage's 
Vindication  of  Principles  of  the  Cyprianic  Age,  chap,  ix.,  sec.  24,  to  the  end  of 
the  chapter. 

t  Richerius,  as  quoted  by  Lawrence  Howel  in  his  History  of  the  Popes,  gives 
avahiable  letter,  illustrative  of  this  paint,  of  Claudius  Sanctius,  a  doctor  of  the 
Sorbonne,  (who  attended  tlie  council  in  company  with  Cardinal  Lotheranus,)  to 
Espensaeus,  his  brother  Sorbounist :  "  Yo!i  never  were  more  fortunate  than  in 
not  coming  hither.  For  had  you  seen  the  vile  practices  here  to  check  the  Refor- 
mation, it  would  have  broken  your  heart.  The  French  were  more  sincere  and 
industrious  in  it  than  others,  who  now  laugh  at  us  for  the  misfortunes  France 
labours  under,  as  if  the  civil  wars  were  a  just  judgment  on  her.  We  arrived 
here  when  the  argument  in  hand  was  about  Holy  Orders.  The  Spanish  bishops 
solicited  earnestly  that  the  synod  would  declare  Episcopacy  an  institution  of 
Christ  ;  and  that  bishops  were  by  divine  right  superior  to  priests.  In  which  the 
French  heartily  concurred  with  them.  But  to  prevent  the  consequence  of  this 
honest  proposition,  the  Italians  propose  and  carry  several  canons  in  favour  of  the 
Pope,  in  opposition  to  what  the  Spanish  bishops  urged ;  by  which  they  pretend 
the  Pope  to  be  the  Bishop  immediately  ordained  of  Christ,  and  that  all  other 
bishops  have  no  power  but  what  is  dependent  of  the  power  of  the  Pope,  or  of 
the  Pope  himself.  It  is  imp'jssible  for  me  to  tell  you  particularly  what  I  have 
seen  and  heard  in  this  council.  I  wish,  though  at  the  peril  of  my  life,  I  were  in 
the  Sorbonue. —  Trent,  June  I5ih,  1563." 


149 

an  objective  reality,  or  of  the  Christian  Church  as  a  divine  institution ; 
faith  with  them  being  no  more  than  their  own  inward  persuasion,  the 
Church  a  thing  of  their  own  creation,  and  both  evanescent,  shifting, 
ephemeral.  Hence  they  dash  forward  with  intemperate  zeal,  and 
think  they  are  cutting  up  Popery  by  the  roots,  when  they  strike 
at  the  apostolical  succession,  the  sacraments,  forms,  every  thing 
indeed  which  gives  fixedness  and  permanency  to  religion.  The 
consequence  is,  that  Romanists  cling  to  their  errors  and  abuses  for 
the  sake  of  the  truth,  from  which  they  are  thus  taught  to  think  them 
inseparable,  and  cling  to  them  with  a  tenacity  proportioned  to  the 
vehemence  with  which  they  are  assailed  ;  while  dispassionate  but 
uninstructed  Protestants,  seeing  the  issue  thus  virtually  made  between 
Romanism  and  infidelity,  are  naturally  led  to  prefer  a  system  which 
has  many  faults  to  one  which  has  no  virtues. 

4,  Another  obstacle  is  the  divisions  of  Protestants,  who  count  well 
nigh  as  many  "  churches"  as  opinions ;  every  man,  whom  the  lust 
of  power  and  popularity  moves  to  be  a  leader,  making  his  favourite 
crotchet  the  foundation  of  a  "church."  The  Romanists  contrast  this 
state  of  things  with  their  own,  and  make  it  an  argument  for  their 
centre  of  unity.  Really  there  is  no  fjrce  in  the  argument ;  for  if  the 
papal  supremacy  be  not,  and  if  Episcopacy  be  a  divine  institution, 
there  is  neither  reason  nor  faith  in  relying  on  the  former ;  it  is  a 
human  prop,  and  must  finally  break  ;  for  whatever  Cardinal  Pallavi- 
cini  and  other  Italians  may  have  thought,  or  may  think  to  the  con- 
trary, Christ  will  live  longer  than  Aristotle.  Besides,  there  are  two 
facts  which  are  an  effectual  offset  against  Protestant  divisions  :  first, 
that  the  oriental  churches,  under  their  metropolitans  and  patriarchs, 
maintain  as  firm  a  union  as  the  Latin  churches  under  their  Pope ; 
and,  secondly,  that  the  Anglican  and  its  derived  churches,  do  not,  at 
the  present  day,  in  the  fourth  century  of  their  deliverance  from  the 
Bishop  of  Rome's  jurisdiction,  present  a  single  instance  of  schism.  I 
mean  that  in  Great  Britain,  in  her  extensive  colonies,  "  on  which  the 
sun  never  sets,"  and  in  the  United  States,  there  is  no  Church  deriving 
its  orders  from  the  Anglican  Church  which  is  not  in  communion  with 
the  Anglican  Church.  The  divisions  of  Protestants  are,  indeed,  a 
startling  fact,  and  tell  powerfully  on  the  imagination  ;  but  in  respect 
to  the  comparative  efficacy  of  co-ordinate  or  republican  communion, 
as  maintained  in  the  Greek  and  Anglican  churches,  and  of  monarchical 
union  as  upheld  by  the  papal  churches,  they  are  utterly  irrelevant 
and  beside  the  mark. 


150 


U,— Pa^e,  40. 

I  was  not  surprised  at  the  defection  of  Bishop  Ives,  but  I  was  sur- 
prised to  learn  from  his  valedictory  letter  to  his  diocese,  that  he  had 
entertained  doubts  about  the  validity  of  his  orders.  Annexed  is  the 
letter  as  it  appeared  in  the  Churchman  of  19th  of  February  last : 

"  Rome,  Wednesday,  Bee.  22,  1852. 

"  Dear  Brethren  : — Some  of  you,  at  least,  are  aware  that  for  years 
doubts  of  the  validity  of  my  office  as  Bishop  have  at  times  harassed 
my  mind  and  greatly  enfeebled  my  action.  At  other  times,  it  is 
true,  circumstances  have  arisen  to  overrule  these  doubts,  and  to  bring 
to  my  mind  temporary  relief.  But  it  has  been  only  temporary  ;  for, 
in  spite  of  resolutions  to  abandon  the  reading  and  the  use  of  Catholic 
books  ;  in  spite  of  earnest  prayers  and  entreaties  that  God  would 
protect  my  mind  against  the  distressing  influence  of  Catholic  Truth ; 
and  in  spite  of  public  and  private  professions  and  declarations,  which 
in  times  of  suspended  doubt  I  sincerely  made  to  shield  myself  from 
suspicion,  and  win  back  the  confidence  of  my  diocese,  which  had  been 
well  nigh  lost — in  sjiite  of  all  this,  and  of  many  other  considerations 
which  would  rise  up  before  me,  as  the  necessary  consequence  of  suf- 
fering my  mind  to  be  carried  forward  in  the  direction  in  which  my 
doubts  pointed,  these  doubts  would  again  return  with  increased  and 
almost  overwhelming  vigour,  goading  me  at  times  to  the  very  bor- 
ders of  derangement. 

"  Under  these  doubts,  I  desired  temporary  relief  from  duties  that 
had  become  so  disquieting  to  me,  and  determined  to  accompany  Mrs. 
Ives,  whose  health  demanded  a  change  of  climate,  in  a  short  absence 
abroad.  But  absence  has  brought  no  relief  to  my  mind.  Indeed, 
the  doubts  that  disturbed  it  have  grown  into  clear  and  settled  con- 
^  victions  ;  so  clear  and  settled,  that,  without  a  violation  of  conscience 
and  honour,  and  every  obligation  of  duty  to  God  and  Ills  Church,  I 
can  no  longer  remain  in  my  position. 

"  I  am  called  upon,  therefore,  to  do  an  act  of  self-sacrifice,  in  view 
of  which  all  other  self  sacrificing  acts  of  my  life  are  less  than  nothing  ; 
called  upon  to  sever  the  ties  which  have  been  strengthen>ed  by  long 
years  of  love  and  forbearance,  which  have  bound  my  heart  to  many 
of  you,  as  was  David's  to  that  of  Jonathan,  and  make  my  heart  bleed 
as  my  hand  traces  the  sentence  which  separates  all  pastoral  relation 
between  us,  and  conveys  to  you  the  knowledge  that  I  hereby  resign 
into  your  hands  my  office  as  Bishop  of  North  Carolina  ;  and,  further, 
that  I  am  determined  to  make  my  submission  to  the  Catholic  Church. 

"  In  addition,  (my  feelings  will  allow  me  only  to  say,)  as  this  act 
is  earlier  than  any  perception  of  my  own,  and  antedates,  by  some 
months,  the  expiration  of  the  time  for  which  1  so  promptly  received 
from  members  of  your  body  an  advance  of  salary,  I  hereby  renounce 
all  claim  upon  the  same,  and  acknowledge  myself  bound,  on  an  inti- 


151 

mation  of  your  wish,  to  return  whatever  you  may  have  advanced  to 
me  beyond  this  22d  day  of  December. 

"  With  continued  affection  and  esteem,  I  pray  you  to  allow  me 
still  to  subscribe  myself, 

"  Your  faithful  friend,  etc., 

"  L.  SiLLiMAN  Ives." 

What  was  in  the  mind  of  Bishop  Ives  when  he  penned  this  letter 
can  only  be  known  to  us  from  the  letter  itself;  and  from  this 
it  appears  that  before  his  fall  he  had  entertained  doubts  about  the 
validity  of  his  office  as  bishop ;  by  which  I,  of  course,  understand 
him  to  mean  the  validity  of  his  orders.  Not  a  word  about  heresy, 
or  schism,  or  the  unlawfulness  of  his  episcopal  ministrations ;  his 
doubts  respected  the  validity  of  his  episcopal  orders  ;  a  mere  ques- 
tion of  fact,  which  any  man  fit  to  serve  on  a  jury  might,  with  compe- 
tent sources  of  information,  have  determined  in  less  time  than  it 
takes  to  try  half  the  questions  of  flict  in  our  common  courts.  "These 
doubts,"  however,  had  "  harassed"  the  mind  of  the  learned  bishop 
"  for  years."  After  an  occasional  respite,  "  these  doubts"  about  the 
validity  of  his  orders  "  would  return  with  increased  and  overwhelm- 
ing vigour,  goading  him  at  times  to  the  very  borders  of  derange- 
ment."    Under  the  pressure  of  "  these  doubts,"  Bishop  Ives  went 

abroad ;  but 

Patriae  quis  extil, 

Se  quoque  lugit  1 

"  these  doubts"  had  become  a  second  nature  and  part  of  himself,  and 
of  course  "  absence"  from  his  native  country  "  brought  no  relief  to 
his  mind."  He  tells  us,  indeed,  that  "  after  a  change  of  climate," 
"  these  doubts,"  whether  or  no  he  had  ever  been  validly  ordained, 
"  have  grown  into  clear  and  settled  convictions"  that  he  had  not  been. 
But  how  long  "  these  doubts"  and  "  clear  convictions"  alternated 
before  the  latter  became  "  settled,"  we  are  left  to  conjecture;  what 
is  certain  is,  that  at  Eome,  on  the  22d  of  December,  he  relinquished 
all  legal  claim  to  the  salary  that  he  had  received  in  advance,  which 
may  be  taken  as  proof,  that  on  that  day,  thanks  to  an  Italian  sky  ! 
the  "  doubts"  disappeared,  and  the  "  clear  convictions"  shone  forth 
with  a  lustre  which  was  "  settled"  and  "  disturbed"  by  no  further 
"  doubts"  until  the  hour  of  his  writing  the  letter. 

The  same  number  of  the  Churchman  which  contains  the  letter  of 
Bishop  Ives,  contains  also  the  following  definite  statement  from 
X'  Univers,  a  Romanist  paper  published  in  France,  which  has  not,  to 
my  knowledge,  been  contradicted  by  Bishop  Ives  or  his  friends  : 


152 

"  Dr.  Ives  left  America  some  weeks  ago,  to  go  and  make  his 
solemn  abjuration  of  the  errors  of  Protestantism  at  the  feet  of  the 
Sovereign  Pontiff.  Before  his  departure  he  gave  his  retraction  into 
the  hands  of  the  Archbishop  of  New-York,  and  participated  in  the 
sacraments  of  the  Church ;  but  the  venerable  convert  wished  this  act 
to  be  kept  secret  in  order  to  procure  from  Pius  IX.  the  sweet  conso- 
lation of  himself  receiving  him  into  his  flock.  However,  considering 
the  possibility  that  he  might  be  lost  on  his  voyage.  Dr.  Ives  gave  to 
Archbishop  Hughes  his  abjuration  in  writing,  furnished  with  the  most 
incontestible  characters  of  authenticity,  in  order  that  this  document 
might  be  made  public  in  case  of  accident." 

I  leave  it  to  the  charity  of  others  to  shield  Bishop  Ives  from  the 
guilt  of  duplicity  by  the  misfortune  of  insanity.  I  am  concerned  with 
neither.  In  truth,  (for  I  have  yet  a  hope  that  the  statement  in  the 
Romanist  paper  may  be  denied  or  qualified,)  I  believe  in  neither ; 
but  I  believe  Bishop  Ives  to  possess  a  mind  over  the  surface  of  which 
(and  it  is  all  surface)  clear  convictions  and  distressing  doubts  about 
a  simple  matter  of  fact  may  chase  each  other  for  years  in  the  quick 
succession  of  clouds  and  sunshine  on  an  April  day.  I  believe  this, 
because  his  letter  proves  it ;  and  all  my  concern  is  to  show  that  the 
validity  of  his  orders,  respecting  which  (as  he  himself  tells  us)  his 
doubts  and  convictions  have  kept  him  on  the  rack  for  years,  is  a  mere 
question  of  fact,  which  a  man  of  common  sense  and  honest  purpose 
might  determine,  without  losing  his  health  and  losing  his  wits,  and 
then  taking  a  voyage  to  Europe  for  the  recovery  (I  hope)  of  the  one, 
but  in  the  vain  pursuit  of  the  other. 

I  had  not  supposed,  indeed,  that  any  man,  who,  with  honest  pur- 
pose and  competent  means  of  information,  had  looked  into  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Anglican  orders,  could  entertain  a  doubt  of  their  validity  ; 
and  that  a  man  of  learning  and  piety,  who  had  been  promoted  to  the 
highest  rank  in  the  Church,  and  called  to  preside  over  one  of  our 
largest  dioceses,  should  be  perplexed  on  the  subject,  and  driven  "  to 
the  very  borders  of  derangement,"  I  cannot  but  regard  as  an  instance 
of  idiosyncraey  more  fit  for  the  study  of  the  physician  than  the 
divine.  In  themselves,  and  for  any  effect  they  may  have  on  us,  the 
Romish  objections  to  our  orders  are  contemptible  ;  but  there  is 
one  point  of  view  in  which  they  are  deserving  of  attention,  and  that 
is,  as  they  illustrate  the  temper  and  spirit  of  the  Romish  Church,  and 
have  been  the  occasion  of  involving  it  in  the  deepest  guilt ;  and  this 
must  be  my  apology  for  a  more  extended  note  on  the  subject  than  I 
should  otherwise  have  made. 

To  understand  the  matter,  the  reader  will  be  pleased  to  call  to 


^  153 

mind  the  distinction  already  noted  between  Orders  and  Jurisdiction. 
Ordination,  or,  as  it  is  commonly  termed  among  us,  Consecration,  is 
all  that  is  necessary  to  make  a  man  a  bishop.  In  order,  however,  to 
the  lawful  exercise  of  jurisdiction,  it  is  further  necessary  that  he  be 
confirmed,  i.  e.,  settled  or  established  in  the  exercise  of  his  functions 
under  certain  limitations  needful  to  the  preservation  of  unity.  In 
the  English  and  American  churches,  bishops  are  confirmed  in  the 
dioceses  to  which  they  are  respectively  chosen,  by  the  highest  spirit- 
ual authority  recognized  b>-  these  churches;  and  Romanists,  even  if 
they  admitted  the  validity  of  our  orders,  would  still  deny  our  juris- 
diction, and  consequently  the  lawfulness  of  our  ministrations,  on  the 
ground  of  our  Bishops  not  having  received  confirmation  from  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  ;  who,  as  they  fancy,  is  entitled  to  supreme  jurisdic- 
tion in  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States,  and  indeed  throughout 
all  the  earth,  as  well  as  in  Italy.  A  claim  so  extravagant  refutes 
itself;  and  hence  the  necessity  of  denying,  not  only  the  lawfulness 
of  our  ministrations,  but  the  validity  of  our  orders:  by  which  is  meant 
that  they  deny  the  fact  that  our  bishops  have  ever  received  orders, 
and  affirm  that  the  orders  to  which  they  pretend,  have  no  existence, 
but  are  null  and  void. 

Catching  at  everything  upon  which  they  can  raise  the  semblance 
of  an  argument  to  help  their  cause,  Romanists  deny  that  the  form 
used  in  the  ordinal  of  Edward  VI.  was  sufficient  to  confer  the  epis- 
copal office.  The  form  was,  "  Take  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  remember 
that  thou  stir  up  the  grace  of  God  which  is  in  thee  by  imposition  of 
hands ;  for  God  hath  not  given  us  the  spirit  of  fear,  but  of  power, 
and  love,  and  of  soberness."  It  must  be  confessed,  that  words  which 
express  the  specific  office  intended  to  be  conferred  would  be  better ; 
and  hence,  in  1<362.  the  words  were  altered,  and  the  form  now  in  use 
was  adopted  :  "  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost  for  the  office  and  work  of  a 
bishop  in  the  Church  of  God,  now  committed  unto  thee  by  the  impo- 
sition of  our  hands  ;  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  Amen.  And  remember,"  &c.,  as  above.  Pro. 
bably  the  only  reason  of  our  Church  having  at  first  used  so  brief  and 
general  a  form,  is,  that  she  had  then  but  just  begun  her  reformation 
from  Popery ;  and  certainly  the  fact  of  her  now  using  a  more  ex- 
pressive form,  is  owing  to  her  having  continued  and  proceeded  in 
that  reformation.  For  the  form  which  accompanies  the  imposition 
of  hands  in  the  Roman  Pontifical  for  the  consecration  of  a  bishop,  is 
simply,  "Take  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum;  and  to 
the  objection  now  brought  by  Romanists  against  the  sufficiency  of 


154 

the  form  in  the  Ordinal  of  Edward  VI.,  we  give  the  same  answer 
which  Vasquez,*  one  of  themselves,  has  given  to  the  same  objection 
against  the  sufficiency  of  their  own  form  ;  viz.,  that  though  the  words 
do  not  express  the  power  intended  to  be  conferred,  yet  the  circum- 
stances which  accompany  the  words  do  express  it ;  the  whole  office 
for  the  consecration  of  bishops  ;  showing  formally  and  expressly  the 
power  or  gift  conferred  by  the  words  which  accompany  the  imposi- 
tion of  hands. 

But  in  order  to  cut  up  our  ordinations  by  the  roots,  the  Romanists 
tell  us  that  Archbishop  Parker,  through  whom  we  derive  our  suc- 
cession of  orders,  had  not  even  the  benefit  of  any  serious  form ;  that 
his  consecration  was  a  jest  and  a  mockery,  dispatched  at  a  tavern. 

The  reader  may  think  that  this  story  is  credited  only  by  the  more 
vulgar  of  the  Romanists.  No;  it  has  been  received  and  endorsed  at 
Rome,  and  is  the  precise  ground  on  which  the  Bishop  of  Rome  and 
his  conclave  have  ruled  against  the  validity  of  Anglican  Orders.  It 
is  well,  therefore,  briefly  to  review  the  facts  connected  with  Parker's 
consecration. 

During  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary,  Reginald  Pole  was  de  facto 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  having  been  schismatically  intruded  by 
the  Pope  of  Rome.  Pole  died  on  the  same  day  with  Queen  Mary, 
so  that  on  the  accession  of  Elizabeth,  the  See  of  Canterbury  was  va- 
cant. Matthew  Parker  was  the  next  incumbent  of  that  See.  The 
Romanists  say  that  he  was  not  lawfully  in  possession,  and  had  no 
right  to  the  See.  This  assertion  we  care  nothing  about ;  it  rests 
on  their  assumption,  that  all  spiritual  jurisdiction  on  earth  pro- 
ceeds from  the  Pope  of  Rome ;  and  we  dismiss  it,  with  the  counter 
assertion,  that  Parker  was  the  true  and  lawful  successor  to  Cranmer, 
as  was  Cranmer  to  Warham  ;  and  that  Pole,  being  a  mere  intruder, 
is  not  to  be  named,  except  as  having  had  possession  in  fact.  But  the 
Romanists  have  also  labored  to  create  a  doubt  about  Parker's  con- 
secration ;  and  this,  indeed,  is  a  point  of  consequence,  and  that  to 
which  I  would  direct  attention.  Parker,  in  fact,  succeeded  Pole  in 
the  See  of  Canterbury,  and  continued  in  possession  to  the  time  of 
his  death.  This  is  not  denied ;  the  only  question  is,  whether  he 
was  consecrated  to  the  office  of  bishop,  or  entered  on  the  duties  of 
his  office  without  consecration.  I  propose  first  to  show  the  sense  of 
the  English  nation  and  Church  at  that  time,  as  to  the  necessity  of 

*  Disp.  240.  c.  5.  n.  GO.  I  give  the  reference  after  Bariiet,  in  his  "  Vindication 
of  the  Ordiuations,"  &c. 


155 

consecration  before  a  man  could  be  accounted  a  bishop,  and  then 
to  ffive  a  synopsis  of  the  testimony  which  proves  the  fact  of  conse- 
oration  in  the  case  of  Parker. 

1,  The  sense  of  the  English  nation  and  Church  maybe  best  knoAvn 
from  the  laws  of  Parliament,  and  the  official  and  synodical  acts  o^ 

the  clergy. 

The  25  Henry  VIII.,  cap.  20.,  sect.  5.,  enacts  that,  whenever  a 
presentment  or   nomination   is  made  by    the    king,  "Then    every 
archbishop  and  bishop,  into  whose  hands  any  such  presentment  and 
nomination  shall  be  directed,  shall,  with  all  speed  and  celerity,  invest 
and  consecrate  the  person  nominated  and  presented  by  the  king's 
highness,  his  heirs  or  successors,  to  the  office  and  dignity  that  such 
person  shall  be  so  presented  unto,  and  give  and  use  unto  him  pall> 
and  all  other  benedictions,  ceremonies,  and  things  requisite  for  the 
same,  without  suing,  procuring,  or  obtaining  hereafter  any  bulls,  or 
other  things  at  the  See  of  Ptome  for  any  such  office  or  dignity  in  that 
behalf.     And  then  after  he  hath  made  such  oath  and  fealty  duly  to 
the  king's  majesty,  his  heirs  and  successors,  as  shall  be  limited  for 
the  same,  the  king's  highness,  by  his  letters  patent  under  his  great 
seal,  shall  signify  the  said  election  to  one  archbishop  and  two   other 
bishops,  or  else  to  four  bishops  within  this  realm,  or  within  any 
other  the  king's  dominions,  to  be  assigned  by  the  king's  highness, 
his  heirs  or  successors,  requiring  and   commanding  the  said  arch- 
bishop and  bishops  with  all  speed  and  celerity,  to  confirm  the  said 
election,  and  to  invest  and  consecrate  the  said  person  so  elected,  to 
the  office  and  dignity  that  he  is  elected  unto,  and  to  give  and  use  to 
him  such  pall,  benedictions,  ceremonies,  and  all  other  things  requi- 
site for  the  same,  without  suing,  procuring  or  obtaining  any  bulls, 
briefs,  or  other  things  at  the  said  See  of  Ptome,  or  by  the  authority 
thereof  in  any  behalf."     And  after  some  further  matter  in  regard  to 
the  temporalities,  it   is   enacted,  in  conclusion,  that  every  person 
''doing  contrary  to  this  act,  shall  run  in  the  dangers,  pains  and 
penalties  of  the  statute  of  Provision  and  Premunire,  made  in  the  five- 
and-twentieth  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Edward  III.,  and  in  the  six- 
teenth year  of  King  Richard  II." 

In  1  Edward  VI.,  c.  2.,  (1547)  certain  modifications,  with  a  view 
to  prevent  delay,  and  to  lessen  costs  and  charges,  are  made  in  the 
election  of  bishops  and  collation  to  their  sees.  It  is  then  enacted : 
"  And,  thereupon,  the  said  person  to  whom  the  archbishopric,  or 
bishopric,  or  suffi-aganship  is  so  conferred,  collated  or  given,  may  be 
consecrated,  and  sue  his  livery,  or  ouster  les  mains,  and   do  other 


156 

things  as  well  as  if  the  said  ceremonies  and  elections  had  been  done 
and  made." 

The  3  Edward  VI., c.  2.,  (1549)  enacts,  that  "Such  form  and  man- 
ner of  making  and  consecrating  of  archbishops,  bishops,  priests  and 
deacons,  and  other  ministers  of  the  Church,  as  by  six  prelates  and 
six  other  men  of  this  realm  learned  in  God's  law,  by  the  king  to  be 
appointed  and  assigned,  or  by  the  most  number  of  them,  shall  be  de- 
vised for  that  purpose,  and  set  forth  under  the  great  seal  before  the 
first  of  April  next  coming,  shall  be  lawfully  exercised  and  used,  and 
none  other." 

In  1552,  an  act  was  passed  in  Parliament,  establishing  the  revised 
Book  of  Common  Prayer;  and  "Adding  also  a  form  and  manner  of 
making  and  consecrating  of  archbishops,  bishops,  priests  and  deacons, 
to  be  of  like  force,  authority  and  value  as  the  same  like  aforesaid 
book,  entitled,  The  Book  of  Common'  Prayer  was  before,  and  to  be 
accepted,  received,  used  and  esteemed  in  like  sort  and  manner." 
The  Book  of  Common  Prayer  had  been  established  in  1549,  and  by 
this  act  of  1552,  the  Ordinal,  or  form  of  consecrating  bishops  and 
ordering  priests  and  deacons,  is  annexed  to  it,  and  the  use  of  it,  to 
the  exclusion  of  all  other  forms,  is  made  obligatory. 

The  preceding  acts  were  repealed  under  Mary ;  but  in  the  first 
year  of  Elizabeth,  the  statute  of  repeal  was  abrogated,  so  far  as  re- 
spected "The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  Administration  of  the 
Sacraments,  and  other  rites  and  ceremonies  in  the  Church  of  England ;" 
and  it  was  enacted,  "  That  the  said  Book,  with  the  order  of  service, 
and  of  the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  rites  and  ceremonies, 
with  the  alterations  and  additions  therein  added  and  appointed  by 
this  estatute,  shall  stand  and  be,  from  and  after  the  said  Feast  of  the 
Nativity  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  in  full  force  and  effect,  according  to 
the  tenor  and  effect  of  this  estatute,  any  thing  in  the  aforesaid  estatute 
of  repeal  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding."  The  "alterations  and 
additions"  respected  the  Sunday  Lessons,  the  Litany,  and  the  sen- 
tences in  the  delivery  of  the  elements  to  communicants,  and  had  no 
reference  to  the  Ordinal. 

These  acts  prove  the  sense  of  the  nation,  and  in  regard  to  the 
sense  of  the  clergy  suffice  it  to  state:  1.  That  the  twelve  commis- 
sioners who  drew  up  the  Ordinal  were  all  taken  from  the  clergy. 
Six  of  them,  Cranmer,  Goodrich,  Holbeck,  Skyp,  Thirleby  and  Eidley 
were  all  bishops ;  and  the  other  six  were  Coxe,  afterwards  Bishop  of 
Ely;  Taylor,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Lincoln;  May,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's  ; 
Heyns,  Dean  of  Exeter ;  Robertson,  Archdeacon  of  Leicester ;  and 


157 

Redmayne,  Archdeacon  of  Taunton.  2.  That  in  1552,  the  Articles  of 
Religion  were  agreed  upon  in  Convocation,  in  which  these  forms  of 
consecrating  and  ordaining  are  sanctioned  as  very  pious,  and  agreeable 
to  the  wholesome  doctrine  of  the  gospel.  To  this  may  be  added,  that 
in  ]  562  the  Convocation  adopted  this  very  article,  in  substance,  but 
put  it  in  a  much  stronger  form ;  the  36th  article  then  agreed  upon, 
the  title  of  which  is,  "  Of  consecration  of  Bishops  and  Ministers," 
being  that  "  The  Book  of  Consecration  of  Archbishops  and  Bishops, 
and  ordering  of  Priests  and  Deacons  lately  set  forth  in  the  time  of 
Edward  VI.,  and  confirmed  at  the  same  time  by  authority  of  Parli- 
ament, doth  contain  all  things  necessary  for  such  consecration  and 
ordering ;  neither  hath  it  any  thing  that  is  of  itself  superstitious  and 
ungodly,  and,  therefore,  whosoever  are  consecrated  and  ordered 
according  to  the  rites  of  that  Book,  since  the  second  year  of  the  afore- 
mentioned King  Edward,  unto  this  time,  or  hereafter  shall  be  con- 
secrated or  ordered  according  to  the  same  rites,  we  decree  all  such 
to  be  rightly,  orderly,  and  lawfully  consecrated  and  ordered."  For 
albeit  this  article  was  adopted  some  two  years  after  the  consecration 
of  Parker,  it  may  yet  be  taken  as  an  indication  of  the  sense  of  the 
Church  at  the  time  of  his  consecration ;  and  indeed  its  bearing  on 
the  case  is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  Archbishop  Parker  himself 
sat  at  the  head  of  that  very  Convocation  which  sanctioned  by  its 
synodical  act  the  impressive  form  of  Consecration  prescribed  in  the 
Ordinal. 

These  acts  show  very  plainly  the  sense  of  the  Church  and  nation 
as  to  the  necessity  of  consecration  ;  and  they  prove,  I  apprehend, 
that  no  man  could,  in  those  times,  have  been  recognized  as  a  bishop 
in  the  Church  of  England  who  had  not  been  solemnly  consecrated  to 
his  office  by  bishops,  agreeably  to  the  form  provided  for  that  purpose 
in  the  Ordinal.  This  was  the  Z«w  of  the  Church  and  the  land  ;  and 
under  this  law  a  man  could  no  more  steal  into  the  office  of  bishop 
then  than  now  ;  nor  could  any  ,man  not  solemnly  consecrated  to  the 
episcopal  office  by  bishops  agreeably  to  the  Ordinal,  have  any  more 
been  then  made  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  than  under  our  present 
laws  a  woman  or  a  Roman  Cardinal  can  be  made  President  of  the 
United  States. 

2.  I  come  now  to  give  a  brief  synopsis  of  the  direct  proofs  of  the 
fact  of  Parker's  consecration. 

On  the  18th  of  July,  1559,  which  was  soon  after  the  accession  of 
Elizabeth,  the  co?i(/e  d'elire  was  issued  to  the  Chapter  of  Canterbury, 
and  on  August  1st  of  the  same  year,  Matthew  Parker  was  elected  to 


158 

that  See.  Both  instruments  are  extant,  and  given  in  the  works  treat- 
ing on  the  subject. 

On  the  6th  of  December  of  the  same  year,  (the  bishops  of  Queen 
Mary  having  been  all  deprived  of  their  sees,  except  Kitchen, 
Bishop  of  Llandaff,)  a  commission  was  issued  to  seven  bishops,  em- 
powering them,  or  a  majority  of  their  number,  to  confirm  Parker's 
election,  and  to  consecrate  him  to  the  office  of  bishop.  The  names 
of  the  bishops  included  in  this  commission,  were  Kitchen,  Barlow, 
Scorye,  Coverdale,  Hodgkins,  Salesbury  and  Bale.  Kitchen  was  at 
the  time  Bishop  of  Llandaff.  Barlow,  Scorye  and  Coverdale  had 
been  bishops  respectively  of  Bath,  Chichester  and  Exeter,  in  King 
Edward's  time,  but  had  been  deprived  of  their  sees  under  Mary. 
Plodgkins  and  Salesbury  were  suffragan  bishops  of  Bedford  and 
Thetford  ;  and  Bale  was  Bishop  of  Ossory.  The  commission  is  ex- 
tant, and  published  in  the  books  treating  on  this  subject.* 

On  the  9th  of  December  of  the  same  year,  Barlow,  Scorye,  Cover- 
dale  and  Hodgkins  confirmed  the  election  of  Parker  ;  and  the  certi- 
ficate of  the  fact  may  be  seen  in  the  books  treating  on  the  subject. 

On  December  17th,  of  the  same  year,  the  four  bishops    above 

*  In  the  conclusion  of  the  Letters-Patent  creating  this  commision,  is  a  clause  sup- 
plying by  royal  authority  defects  which  the  exigency  of  the  times  might  require 
to  be  supplied  in  carrying  out  the  commission.  Romanists  are  fond  of  nibbling 
at  this  clause,  as  if  it  were  intended  to  supply  that  very  power  of  ordination  or 
consecration  which  by  Divine  Institution  is  vested  exclusively  in  the  bishops  of 
the  Church,  and  which,  because  of  its  being  so  limited  by  divine  institution,  no  par- 
liamentary statutes  nor  ecclesiastical  laws,  nor  any  human  authority,  can  possibly 
supply.  The  statesmen  of  that  day,  however,  knew  their  province  too  well  to 
be  guilty  of  any  such  egregious  and  presumptuous  folly,  and  hence  the  defects 
to  be  supplied  are  limited,  by  express  words,  to  those  which  might  arise  from  the 
statute  or  ecclesiastical  laws  of  the  realm  ;  supplentes,  &c.,  si  quid  *  *  *  desit 
aut  deerit  eorum,  quae  per  statuta  hujus  regni,  aut  per  leges  ecclesiasticas  in 
hac  parte  requiruntur.  The  explanation  is  found  in  the  fact  that  some  of  the 
bishops  to  whom  the  commission  is  addressed  had  been  deprived  of  their  sees 
under  Mary,  and  had  either  not  been  elected  to,  or  not  put  in  possession  of,  other 
sees  at  the  time  the  commission  was  issued.  The  clause  is  indeed  peculiar  to 
this  commission,  and  is  in  a  manner  required  by  its  opening  sentence,  which 
directs  the  commission,  not  as  is  usual  to  diocesan  Jbishops,  but  to  bishops, 
some  of  whom  had,  at  the  time,  no  dioceses  under  their  charge  ;  as  for  instance, 
to  Barlow,  formerly  Bishop  of  Bath,  now  Bishop  Elect  of  Chichester,  and  to 
Coverdale,  formerly  Bishop  of  Exeter.  "  Regina,  &c.,  Reverendis,  in  Christo 
Patribus  Antonio  Landav.  Episcopo,  Willielmo  Barloo  quondam  Bathon.  Epis- 
copo,  nunc  Cicest.  electo,  Johanni  Scorye,  quondam  Cicest.  episcopo,  nunc  Here- 
fordensi  [electo]  Mil  Coverdale  quondam  Exoniensi  episcopo,  Ricardo  Bedfor- 
densi,  &c. 


159 

named,  viz.,  Barlow,  Scorye,  Coverdale  and  Hodgkins,  consecrated 
Matthew  Parker  in  the  Chapel  of  the  Archiepiscopal  Palace  at  Lam- 
beth, using  the  form  which  had  been  set  forth  in  the  reign  of  Edward 
VI,  The  record  of  the  consecration  was  entered  in  the  Archbishop's 
register,  and  the  original  copy  of  the  act  is  still  preserved  in  Corpus 
Christi  College,  Cambridge.  It  may  be  seen  in  most  of  the  books  on 
Anglican  Orders. 

The  fact  of  the  consecration  is  mentioned  in  contemporary  histo- 
ries;  in  Hollingshead's  Chronicle  and  Camden's  Elizabeth;  by  the 
latter  in  these  words :  "  Matthew  Parker,  a  religious  and  learned  man, 
and  of  most  modest  manners,  who,  being  chaplain  to  King  Henry 
VIII.,  had  been  Dean  of  the  Collegiate  Church  of  Stoke-Clare  ;  he 
was  solemnly  elected  to  the  Archbishopric  of  Canterbury,  and  con- 
secrated at  Lambeth,  after  a  sermon  and  invocation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  celebration  of  the  Eucharist,  by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands 
of  three  Bishop?,  William  Barlowe,  formerly  Bishop  of  Bath ;  John 
Scorye,  formerly  Bishop  of  Chichester ;  Miles  Coverdale,  formerly 
Bishop  of  Exeter,  and  of  John,  suffragan  of  Bedford." 

Archbishop  Parker  afterwards  consecrated  and  confirmed  Grindall, 
Cox,  Sands,  Merrick,  Young,  Bullingham,  Jewell,  Davis,  Guest,  Bark- 
ley,  Bentham,  Alley,  Parkhurst,  Home,  Cheney,  and  Scambler  ;  and 
he  confirmed  Barlowe  in  the  See  of  Chichester,  and  Scorye  in  the  See 
of  Hereford.  These  men  afterwards  took  possession  of  their  sees, 
and  enjoyed  them  during  their  lives ;  and,  of  course,  (Browne's 
Nag's  Head  Fable,  p.  168,)  the  fact  of  their  being  duly  confirmed 
and  consecrated  must  have  been  certified  to  the  government  before 
they  could  be  admitted  to  do  homage,  and  be  installed  in  their  epis- 
copal chairs,  and  have  a  writ  to  be  put  in  possession  of  their  tern, 
poralities. 

I  will  only  add,  that  seven  years  afterwards,  {.  c,  in  the  year  1506, 
an  act  of  Parliament  was  passed,  in  which  it  is  declared  that  the 
queen  had  "  caused  divers  and  sundry  grave  and  well-learned  men 
to  be  duly  elected,  made  and  consecrated  archbishops  and  bishops 
of  divers  archbishopricks  and  bishopricks  within  this  realm,  and  other 
her  majesty's  dominions  and  countries,  according  to  such  order  and 
form,  with  such  ceremonies  in  and  about  their  consecration,"  as  are 
prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer ;  and  enacting  "  that  all 
persons  that  have  been,  or  shall  be  made,  ordered  or  consecrated 
archbishops,  priests,  ministers  of  God's  Holy  Word  and  sacraments, 
or  deacons,  after  the  form  and  order  prescribed  in  the  said  order  and 
form,  how  archbishops,  bishops,  priests,  deacons  and  ministers  should 


160 

be  consecrated,  made  and  ordered,  be  in  very  deed,  and  also  by  au- 
thority hereof,  declared  and  enacted  to  be,  and  shall  be  archbishops? 
bishops,  priests,  ministers  and  deacons,  and  rightly  made,  ordered 
and  consecrated  ;  any  statute,  law,  canon,  or  other  thing  to  the  con- 
trary notwithstanding."  The  manifest  purpose  of  the  statute  is  to 
bring  the  bishops,  whose  consecration  it  acknowledges,  under  the  pro- 
tection of  the  State,  to  guard  them  in  their  legal  privileges,  and  to 
shield  them  from  cavil  and  prosecution  in  the  temporal  courts ;  and 
the  Romanists  show  stark  ignorance,  or  something  worse  than  igno- 
rance, when  they  represent  it  as  intended  to  supply  the  want  of  con- 
secration. The  statute  is  alone  and  of  itself  a  sufficient  proof  of 
Parker's  consecration. 

Not  so  much  for  proof  (though  proof  it  is)  as  to  enliven  these  dry 
details  with  a  breath  of  the  devout  and  heavenly  spirit  of  the  good 
and  great  man  who  has  thus  been  set  up  as  a  mark  for  papistical 
scoffers  and  revilers,  I  give  the  following  extract  (which  has  been 
often  before  published)  from  a  parchment  roll  preserved  in  Christ 
Church  College.  Cambridge,  and  containing,  in  the  form  of  a  diary 
the  principal  events  of  Archbishop  Parker's  life,  all  written  in  his 
own  hand  : 

1559,  IT. — Decembr.  Ann.  1559. — Consecratus  sum  in  Archiepis. 
copum  cantuarien. 

Heu  !  Heu  !  Domine  Deus  in  quae  tempora  servasti  me  ?  Jam 
veni  in  profundum  aquarum,  &  tempestas  demersit  me. 

O  !  Domine  vim  patior,  responde  pro  me,  &  spiritu  tuo  principal! 
confirma  me.     Homo  enim  sum.  &  exigui  temporis,  &  minor,  &;c. 

Da  mihi  fidium  tuarum,  &ic. 

Such  is  an  outline  of  the  evidence  in  favour  of  Parker's  consecra- 
tion. The  Church  and  the  nation,  as  proved  by  their  synodical  and 
parliamentary  acts,  belie,ving  that  no  man  could  be  made  bishop 
without  being  consecrated,  and  after  a  solemn  form,  by  bishops, 
creating  an  invincible  necessity  that  he  should  be  consecrated  before 
he  could  take  possession,  as  no  one  has  ever  denied  that  he  did  take 
possession,  of  the  See  of  Canterbury.  The  fact  of  his  consecration, 
attested  by  public  records  and  contemporary  history  ;  received,  with- 
out a  doubt,  by  a  communion,  the  fundamental  principle  of  which  is 
the  fact  of  an  unbroken  succession  in  the  order  of  bishops,  and  a 
large  proportion,  not  to  say  a  majority,  of  whose  clergy  have  believed 
in  the  necesSty  of  that  succession  to  the  very  being  of  a  Christian 
Church  ;  never  questioned  by  Puritans,  the  bitter  enemies  of  the 
doctrine  of  apostolical  succession,  and  of  the  claim  made  to  it  by 


161 

the  Anglican  Church ;  and  admitted,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  by 
Romanists  of  great  namej  in  opposition  to  the  stream  of  their  own 
communion,  and  constrained  by  the  mere  force  of  truth. 

And  now  what  has  the  Church  of  Rome,  speaking  at  Rome  and 
through  the  mouth  of  her  "  Sovereign  Pontiff,"  to  offer  in  disproof  of 
Archbishop  Parker's  consecralilan  ?  The  herd  of  writers  who  are 
subject  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  impugn  Parker's  consecration,  as  we 
have  seen,  both  on  ritual  and  historical  grounds,  denying  the  sufh- 
ciency  of  the  form  used  in  the  consecration,  and  setting  up  a  counter 
statement  in  opposition  to  that  attested  by  the  public  records  of  the 
Church  and  nation.  But  the  Church  of  Rome  itself,  as  I  shall  now 
show,  was  debarred  from  the  former  ground,  and  therefore  driven  of 
necessity  on  the  latter. 

On  the  accession  of  Mary,  Pope  Julius  III.  appointed  Cardinal  Pole 
Legate  de  Latere  from  the  Roman  see,  with  full  power  and  authority 
to  reconcile  England  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  Of  the  English  clergy 
then  living,  some  had  received  orders  under  Henry  Vlil.,  and  others 
under  Edward  VI. ;  the  former,  both  bishops  and  clergy,  having 
been  ordained  according  to  the  Roman  forms,  and  the  latter  accord- 
ino-  to  the  ordinal  of  Edward  VI.  This  Bull  of  Julius  III.  to  Cardinal 
Pole,  (which  is  given  by  Burnet,  vol.  iii.  fol.  ed.,  p.  215  of  the  records,) 
mentions  expressly  the  bishops  and  archbishops  who  had  received 
their  livings  from  the  hand  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward  VI ;  puts  no 
distinction  between  the  ordinations  performed  according  to  the  Roman 
Pontifical,  and  those  performed  according  to  the  ritual  of  the  English 
Church  ;  but  provides  that  both,  when  reconciled  to  the  Roman  see 
and  re-habilitated,  shall  be  admitted,  if  worthy  and  fit  in  other  respects, 
to  preside  as  bishops  and  archbishops  over  the  Cathedrals  and  Metro- 
politan sees,  to  rule  and  govern  the  same  in  spirituals  and  temporals, 
and  to  exercise  the  functions  of  their  episcopal  office.  To  remove 
all  difUculties,  however,  a  dispensation  is  granted,  under  favour  of 
which  Presbyters,  even  though  irregularly  ordained,  (evidently  refer- 
ring to  those  ordained  by  the  English  ordinal,)  might  be  rein- 
stated, and  serve  in  their  order  and  receive  episcopal  consecration, 
without  receiving  the  priesthood  anew ;  a  plaiin  recognition  of  the 
validity  of  their  orders ;  since,  had  their  orders  been  accounted  null, 
a  dispensation,  which  extends  only  to  human,  and  never  to  divine 
laws,  could  not  have  supplied  the  defect. 

This  Bull  to  Cardinal  Pole,  virtually  acknowleging  the  validity  of 
the  orders  conferred  according  to  the  ordinal  of  Edward  VI,,  was 
dated  at  Rome,  A.  D.  1554  :  five  years  afterwards,  Parker  was  con- 

11 


163 

secrated  by  the  same  ordinal ;  and  when  the  question  of  the  validity 
of  Parker's  consecration,  and  of  the  bishops  deriving  from  him,  was 
distinctly  submitted  to  the  judgment  of  the  Roman  see,  it  came  up 
and  was  determined,  not  on  ritual,  but  on  historical'  grounds.  In 
other  words,  the  fiict  of  Parker's  consecration,  attested  as  it  is  by 
all  the  proofs  of  which  a  fact  is  capable,  was  denied.  And  on  what 
grounds  was  it  denied  ?  What  was  the  counter  statement,  and  by 
what  testimony  supported,  which  availed  in  the  judgment  of  the 
Roman  Church  to  invalidate  and  overthrow  the  authentic  statement  1 
The  reader  shall  have  the  story  in  the  words  in  which  it  was  first 
published,  A.  D.  1604,  or  just  forty -five  years  after  Parker's  conse- 
cration, by  the  Jesuit  Holy  wood  : 

"  In  the  beginning  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign,  the  bishops  of  the 
sectaries  were  to  be  made.  They  that  wanted  ordination  (candidati) 
met  at  London,  at  an  inn  in  the  street  called  Cheapside,  at  the  sign 
of  the  Nag's  Head,  and  together  with  them  came  the  old  simple 
Bishop  of  Landaff,  (Landasensis,  as  it  is  the  Latin  all  along,)  to 
give  them  orders.  Which,  as  soon  as  Bonner,  (Bonnerus,)  then  Dean 
of  the  bishops  in  England,  came  to  understand,  he  sent  his  chaplain 
fi'ora  the  Tower,  (where  he  was  imprisoned  for  his  religion,)  to  com- 
mand Landaff,  under  pain  of  excommunication,  not  to  ordain  the  new 
bishops.  By  Which  menace,  Landaff,  being  frightened,  drew  back, 
and  making  use  of  many  pretences,  avoided  the  sacrilegious  ordina- 
tion. Hereupon  the  persons  waiting  for  orders  (candidati)  began  to 
be  in  a  great  rage,  to  abuse  Landaff,  and  to  consider  of  taking  new 
measures.  To  say  no  more,  Scory,  the  monk,  afterwards  the  mock. 
Bishop  of  Hereford,  imposes  hands  upon  the  rest,  and  some  of  them 
impose  hands  upon  Scory,  and  so  the  children  are  born  without  a 
father,  and  the  fiither  is  begotten  by  the  children,  a  thing  never  heard 
of  in  any  age  before.  This  Thomas  Neale,  reader  of  the  Hebrew 
tongue  at  Oxford,  who  was  present,  related  to  the  old  confessors  for 
religion,  and  they  to  me.  And  the  story  is  confirmed  by  its  being 
afterwards  enacted  in  Parliament  that  these  parliamentary  prelates 
should  be  esteemed  lawful  bishops."* 

Neal  was  Bonner's  chaplain  ;  and  Bonner  was  indicted  at  the 
King's  Bench  for  refusing  to  acknowledge  the  jurisdiction  of  Home, 
(who  M'as  consecrated  by  Parker,)  and  had  two  of  the  greatest  lawyers 
in  the  kingdom  to  manage  his  defence ;  but  neither  then  nor  ever  after, 
wards  have  we  a  word  of  this  ridiculous  story  from  Bonner.   Harding, 

*  See  Browne's  Story  of  the  Ordination,  &c.,  p.  9. 


163 

Stapleton  and  Sanders  flourished  at  the  time,  butnot  asyHableof  the 
story  is  found  in  theni  or  any  other  Romish  author  before  its  publi- 
cation by  Holy  wood  ;  and  though  afterwards  several  of  these  authors 
repeat  the  story  on  the  authority  of  the  same  Thomas  Neal,  yet  they 
all  report  it  with  different  and  even  contradictory  particulars.  A 
story  like  this,  which  has  vulgarity  and  falsehood  stamped  on  its  face; 
which  was  attested  at  the  time  of  its  publication  by  no  living  witness, 
but  was  exhaled  and  blown  about  on  the  hearsays  of  hearsays,  (for 
Holy  wood  had  it  from  the  "  old  confessors,"  and  the  "  old  confessors" 
had  it  from  Thomas  Neal)  ;  which  sought,  but  sought  in  vain,  to 
get  some  semblance  of  truth  from  the  impudent  charge  of  forgery 
which  its  partisans  have  brought  against  the  most  solemn  records  of  a 
nation  ;  a  story  like  this,  every  man,  I  apprehend,  who  had  no  sinis- 
ter end  to  answer  by  its  propagation,  would  dismiss  at  once  as  "  a 
silly  fiible  and  abominable  scandal." 

But  the  reader  will  require  proof  that  this  absurd  fable  has  been 
formally  adopted  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  he  shall  have  it ;  only 
let  us  first  do  that  justice  to  the  Romanists  as  to  confess  that  some 
of  them  have  risen  above  the  spirit  of  cavil  and  gossip  which  their 
leaders  have  shown  in  this  matter. 

Cudsemius,  who  travelled  in  England  during  the  reign  of  Elizabeth, 
and  wrote  a  treatise  De  Desp.  Calvin.  Causa,  printed  A,  D.  1609,  has 
this  remarkable  passage  :* 

"  As  respects  the  state  of  the  Calvinisticf  sect  in  England,  it  is  so 
constituted  that  it  may  either  last  a  long  time  or  be  suddenly  and 
rapidly  dissolved  ;  and  the  reason  is,  that  they  have  there  the  Catholic 
order,  in  .the  perpetual  series  of  their  bishops,  iind  a  lawful  succession 
of  pastors  ;  in  honour  of  which  we  are  wont  to  call  the  English  Cal- 
vinists  schismatics,  instead  of  applying  to  them  the  harsher  term  of 
heretics." 

*  I  have  merely  translated  the  passage  from  Cudsemius  as  I  find  it  in  Dr.  El- 
rington,  (to  whom  also  I  am  indebted  lor  the  extracts  from  Peter  Walsh,)  and 
subjoin  the  original : 

"Quod  CalvinianEC  sects  in  Anglia  statum  attinet,  ille  ita  compara'us  est  ut  vel 
admodum  longo  tempore  darare  posset,  vel  etiam  subito  &  repente  mutari, 
propter  Catholicum  ibidem  in  perpetua  Episcoporum  suorum  serie,  legitimaque 
pastorum  successione,  ab  ecclesia  accepta  ordinem,  ob  cujus  honorem  Anglos 
Calvinistas  mitiore  vocabulo  uon  hereticos,  sed  schismaticos  appellare  solemus." 

t  "  12mo.  Maguntiae,  1609,  c.  xi.,  p.  121.  We  know  that  Calvin  was  not  the 
founder  of  the  English  Reformation,  but  the  classing  all  the  Reformed  Churches 
together  is  no  uncommon  mistake." — Dr.  Elrington. 


164 

The  celebrated  Peter  Walsh,  in  an  introductory  discourse  to  his 
History  of  the  Irish  Remonstrance,  makes  the  following  remarks  : 

"  In  that  place  where  I  seem  somewhat  too  severe  on  Matthew 
Parker,  the  first  Protestant  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  under  Queen 
Elizabeth,  you  must  not  persuade  yourself  I  do  at  all  reflect  upon 
his  ordination,  as  if  indeed  that  had  been  not  only  uncanonical  or 
unlawful,  but  really  void  and  null,  or  (as  the  schoolmen  speak)  in- 
valid :  were  I  to  deliver  my  opinion  of  this  matter,  or  were  it  my 
purpose  to  speak  thereof,  I  would  certainly  hold  myself  obliged  in 
conscience  (for  any  thing  I  know  yet)  to  concur  with  them  who  doubt 
not  the  ordination  of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  in  the  Protestant 
•Church  of  England,  to  be  (at  least)  valid.  And  yet  I  have  read  all 
whatever  hath  been  to  the  contrary  objected  by  Roman  Catholic 
writers,  whether  against  the  matter  or  form,  or  want  of  power  in  the 
first  consecrators,  by  reason  of  their  schism  and  heresy,  or  of  their 
being  deposed  formerly  from  the  sees,  &c.  But  I  have  withal  ob- 
served nothing  of  truth  alleged  by  the  objectors,  which  might  in  the 
leas't  persuade  any  man  who  is  acquainted  with  the  known  divinity,  or 
doctrine  of  the  present  schools,  (besides  what  Richardus  Amarchanus 
long  since  writ,  and  with  the  annals  of  our  Roman  Church  ;)  unless, 
peradventure,  he  would  turn  so  frantic  at  the  same,  as  to  question 
even  the  validity  also  of  our  own  ordination  in  the  said  Roman 
Church,  on  pretence,  forsooth,  either  of  the  form  of  the  Sacrament 
altered  at  the  pleasure  of  men,  or  succession  of  Bishops  interrupted 
by  so  many  schisms,"  &c. 

And  the  same  able  and  learned  writer  afterwards,  on  occasion  of 
some  remarks  made  respecting  his  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
repeats  this  opinion,  saying,  that  "  The  ordination  in  the  Protestant 
Church  of  England  is  valid,  according  both  to  the  public  doctrines  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  schools  themselves,  and  the  ancient  rituals  of 
■all  the  Catholic  Churches,  Latin  and  Greek." 

Le  Courayer,  a  learned  divine  of  the  Galilean  Church,  is  remark- 
able as  having  written  a  set  treatise  in  favor  of  the  validity  of  the 
Anglican  Ordinations.  To  these,  says  Dr.  Elrington,  may  be  added 
the  names  of  Davenport,  (Santa  Clara,)  Pere  Arnaud,  Doctor  Snel- 
laerts.  Professor  of  History  at  Lou  vain  in  the  latter  end  of  the  17th 
century  ;  of  the  Abbe  Longuerue  referred  to  by  Courayer,  and  Bos- 
suet,  Bishop  of  Meaux. 

In  our  own  times.  Dr.  Lingard,  the  celebrated  author  of  a  work 
entitled  "  A  History  of  England,"  having  stated  vol.  vii.,  note  I,  that 


165 

Parker  was  consecrated  December  17,  1559,  by  Barlow,  Scorey,  Co- 
verdale,  and  Ilodgkins,  Suffragan  of  Bedford,  adds: 

"The  ceremony  was  performed,  though  with  a  little  variation, 
according  to  the  ordinal  of  Edward  VI.  Two  of  the  consecrators, 
Barlow  and  Hodgkins,  had  been  ordained  bishops  according  to  the 
Roman  Pontifical,  the  other  two  according  to  the  reformed  ordinal. 
(Wilkins'  Concil,  iv.,  198.)  Of  this  consecration  on  the  17th  of 
December,  there  can  be  no  doubt;  perhaps  in  the  interval,  between 
the  refusal  of  the  Catholic  prelates  and  the  performance  of  the  cere- 
mony, some  meeting  may  have  taken  place  at  the  Nag's  Head  which 
gave  rise  to  the  story." 

I  adduce  these  not  as  the  testimony,  whether  willing  or  reluctant, 
of  adversaries  (for  we  need  nothing  of  this  sort),  but  as  instances  of 
individual  fairness  that  appear  in  favorable  contrast  with  the  general 
temper  of  the  Pvoman  Church.  It  is  of  the  proceedings  of  that  Church 
that  I  am  now  to  speak. 

On  Thursday,  17th  of  April,  1704,  John  Clement  Gordon,  who 
had  been  Archbishop  of  Glasgow,  in  the  Episcopal  Church  of  Scot- 
land, (which  Church,  as  well  as  ours,  has  derived  its  orders  from  the 
Church  of  England  since  the  Pteformation,)  and  was  afterwards  known 
as  Abbot  Gordon,  having  become  a  convert  to  the  Roman  Church, 
presented  himself  at  Rome,  and  petitioned  the  Pope,  Clement  XL,  to 
confer  on  him  holy  orders  anew,  on  the  ground  that  the  orders  which 
he  had  received  in  the  Scotch  Episcopal  Church  w^ere  null  and  void. 
The  petition  of  Gordon,  together  w  ith  the  action  on  it  at  Rome,  is 
published  by  Le  Quien  Pieces  Justificatives,  p.  l.xix.,  and  thence 
transferred  by  Dr.  Elrington  to  his  Appendix,  Ixxvii.  As  I  am  not 
aware  that  the  document  has  ever  appeared  in  English,  I  shall  trans- 
late it  entire  : 

Memorial  presented  to  Pope  Clement  XL,  by  the  Congregation  of  the 
Holy  Office,  on  behalf  of  John  Clement  Gordon,  who  had  been  Bishop 
of  Glasgoiv,  and  teas  desirous  of  being  re  ordained. 

Most  Blessed  Father  : 

John  Clement  Gordon,  a  Scotchman,  lately  converted  to  the  faith 
at  Rome,  most  humbly  throwing  himself  at  the  feet  of  your  Ilulrness, 
sets  forth,  that  he  obtained  in  his  country  the  grade  of  the  Episcopate, 
consecrated,  however,  by  the  rite  of  heretics.  But  inasmuch  as  he 
thinks  consecration  of  this  sort  to  be  null,  for  the  reason  annexed 
to  this  petition,  and  earnestly  desires  to  be  admitted,  from  this  doubt- 
ful and  suspended  grade,  to  a  certain  ecclesiastical  state,  and  to  serve 
God  and  the  Catholic  Church ;  therefore, 


166 

Your  Petitioner  reverently  supplicates  that  your  Holiness  vouch- 
safe to  declare  that  ordination  of  this  sort  is  unlawful  and  null ;  and 
to  dispense  with  him,  that  he  may  be  able  to  receive  holy  orders  by 
the  Catholic  rite.     And  God,  &c. 

Reason  why  your  Petitioner  thinhs.  tuith  the  most  part  of  Catholics, 
and  even  of  the  heterodox,  that  the  ordinations  of  the  Anr/Ucan  heterodox 
can  by  no  means  be  declared  valid. 

For  that  they  may  be  declared  valid,  it  ought  to  be  held,  not 
doubtfully  but  certainly,  that  the  pretended  bishops  have  the  true 
character  of  Episcopacy  ;  that  they  have,  by  some  succession,  re- 
ceived lawful  ordination  and  consecration  from  the  Catholic  Church; 
and  finally,  that  the  essential  form,  matter  and  intention,  have  been, 
and  are  yet,  applied  by  these  pseudo-bishops  in  their  consecrations, 
r.or,  indeed,  if  any  of  these  three — to  wit,  character,  lawful  consecra- 
tion and  form,  or  intention,  be  wanting,  it  must  needs  be  confessed, 
with  all  theologians,  that  the  consecration  be  declared  null  and  in- 
valid. 

Now,  as  respects  the  first,  the  heretics,  the  most  learned  of  Ihat 
country  (as  if  convinced  by  the  light  of  truth)  confess  that  there  is 
among  them  no  power  of  ordination  which  has  not  been  derived  upon 
them  from  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Bridges,  the  Pseudo- 
Bishop  of  Oxford,  in  Defence  of  the  Government,  &c.,  p.  278, 
frankly  confesses  this.  These  are  his  words  :  "If  our  brethren  will 
have  papists  to  be  mere  laymen,  we  too,  and  all  our  ministers,  will 
be  mere  laymen.  For  who  ordained  us  ministers,  but  they  who 
were  of  their  ministry  1  Unless,  perchance,  they  will  have  it  that 
ministers  are  made  by  the  people,"  which  last  the  pretended  minister 
(Ministellus)  denied.  He  is  not  to  be  believed,  however,  when  he 
asserts  for  his  party  that  they  had  their  ministry  from  the  Catholics, 
inasmuch  as  he  alleges  no  proof  of  successive  ordination.  But  this 
being  taken  away,  no  traces  of  consecration  remain  among  the  here- 
tics, except  a  ministry  received  from  the  people,  or  from  a  lay  prince. 
And  if  no  lawful  ordination  and  consecration,  sacerdotal  or  episcopal, 
has  been  derived  upon  them  from  orthodox  Roman  Catholic  bishops, 
they  consequently  possess  no  character,  no  consecration,  and  are 
therefore  unable,  validly,  to  confer  this  on  others.  But  that  your 
Petitioner  may  not  seem  in  this  matter  (which  is  the  source  of  his 
doubt)  to  rely  only  on  the  assertions  of  heretics,  he  invincibly  proves 
the  invalidity  of  their  consecrations  by  these  arguments  taken  from 
history. 

It,  is  certain  that,  in  the  schism  and  abjuration  of  the  true  fiiith  in 
England,  no  bishop  went  over  to  the  side  of  the  heretics,  except  one, 
Anthony  Kitchin  by  name,  Bishop  of  Llandaft',  a  comparatively  weak 
man  in  doctrine  and  knowledge;  who,  however,  being  deputed  by 
Queen  Elizabeth  to  the  execrable  office  of  ordaining,  was  so  far  from 
complying  that  he  feigned  himself  blind,  and  so,  unequal  to  the  task 
imposed  on  him  ;  and,  detesting  the  deed,  could  be  prevailed  on  by 
no  threats  to  perform  it.  (So  Harding  mConfuta.Apolog.Partll. 
c.  2.)     The  same  thing  w^as  known  to  Stowe,  the  English  chronolo- 


167 

gist — although,  as  we  are  assured  by  Constable,  an  English  noble- 
man, in  his  manuscript  work,  p,  13,  he  did  not  dare,  for  fear  of  the 
government,  to  insert  it  in  his  Annals. 

There  was  also,  about  this  time,  in  the  Tower  of  London,  a  certain 
Irish  archbishop,  whom  the  heretics  besought,  with  the  promise  of 
liberty  and  rewards,  to  take  pity  on  the  destitution  of  their  Church, 
and  ordain  for  it  ministers.  But  the  good  man,  (says  Sanders,)  De 
Schismate,  p.  400,  could  by  no  means  be  induced  to  lay  holy  hands  on 
the  heretics,  or  2^(irtake  of  the  sins  of  others.  When,  however,  the 
heretics  saw  themselves  baulked  of  their  hope,  they  come  together, 
by  a  preconcerted  plan,  on  an  appointed  day,  in  the  year  1559,  to  the 
Tavern  of  the  Horse^s  Head,  in  Cheapside-street,  London,  and  resolve 
what  is  to  be  done.  At  length,  amidst  the  tumult  of  those  present, 
(for  there  were  many  there.)  they  choose  John  Scory,  an  apostate 
monk,  not  a  bishop,  to  go  through  a  show  of  ordination.  lie  had 
read  in  the  Second  Book  on  the  Church  by  Junius,  (misprinted  Tunii,) 
one  of  the  reformed,  chap.  4,  that  imposition  of  hands  in  the  Church 
was  anciently  nothing  else  than  a  joining  of  hand  to  hand  in  token 
of  friendship.  Accordingly  he  orders  the  bye-standers  to  fall  on  their 
knees,  and  taking  one  Parker,  a  layman,  by  the  right  hand,  "  Up," 
says  he,  ^[my  Lord  Bisho])  of  Canterbury,  rise  !" 

He,  in  like  manner,  ordained  some  of  those  who  were  present  by 
this  rite.  That  this  so  happened  was  attested  by  Thomas  Neal,  an 
eye-witness,  professor  of  the  Hebrew  tongue  at  Oxford,  to  one  Ha- 
berley,  a  friend  of  his,  when  both  were  living  in  Belgium,  in  exile 
from  their  country,  on  accoimt  of  religion.  There  was  published  in- 
deed at  London,  in  the  year  1613,  that  is,  fifty-four  years  after  the 
afore-mentioned  occurrence,  the  book  of  a  certain  Anglican,  by  the 
name  of  Francis  !Masou ;  he  pretended  that  he  had  found  in  a  certain 
record  a  succession  of  bishops  ordained  by  Catholics.  But  this  is 
exploded  by  all,  and  no  wonder,  for  he  brings  no  proof  of  his  asser- 
tion. It  is,  therefore,  certain,  that  they  have  received  no  valid  ordi- 
nation from  the  true  Church,  and  so  no  character,  and  consequently 
that  their  ordinations  are  invalid  and  null. 

Add,  that  although  any  heretic  had  received  a  certain  episcopal 
ordination  and  consecration  by  a  lawful  succession,  (which,  however, 
is  proved  by  no  argument,)  yet  still  their  ordinations  ought  to  be 
pronounced  invalid  for  defect  of  matter,  form  and  due  intention. 
For  they  use  no  matter,  except,  perhaps,  the  delivery  of  Bibles ; — 
no  lawful  form — nay,  they  have  rejected  the  Catholic  form  and 
changed  it  into  this:  Talce  thou  authority  to  preach  the  Word  of  God, 
and  administer  His  holy  Sacraments  ;  which  essentially  difters  from 
the  orthodox  forms.  And  then,  what  intention  can  possibly  be  formed 
by  those  wdio  deny  that  Christ,  or  the  first  Church,  instituted  any 
unbloody  sacrifice  1  And  the  sacrifice  being  removed,  the  priest  is 
removed  ;  the  priest  being  removed,  the  bishop  is  removed  ;  both 
being  removed,  there  are  taken  aivay,  as  saith  St.  Jerome  in  his  Dial. 
against  the  Luciferians.  the  Church,  the  Faith,  and  the  Gospel. 

Finally,  it  has  ever  been  the  constant  use  in  England,  that  if  an 
heretical  minister  returned  to  the  bosom  of  the  Church,  he  should  be 


.      168 

accounted  as  a  layman.  Whence  if  he  be  in  the  marriage  bond,  he 
may  remain  in  the  same;  but  if  he  be  free,  and  desirous  to  enter  the 
ecclesiastical  state,  he  may  be  ordained  after  the  manner  of  other 
Catholics  ;  or,  if  he  please,  he  may  marry,  &c.     Therefore,  &c. 

Thursday,  April  17th,  1704,  in  the  general  congregation  of  the 
Holy  Roman  and  Universal  Inquisition,  held  in  the  Apostolic  Palace 
at  St.  Peter's,  before  the  most  holy  lord,  our  Lord  Clement,  by 
Divine  Providence  the  eleventh  Pope  [of  that  name,]  and  in  presence 
of  the  most  eminent  and  most  reverend  lords  cardinals  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Church,  specially  deputed  by  the  Holy  Apostolic  See  Inquisi- 
tors-General in  the  whole  Christian  commonwealth  against  heretical 
pravity  : 

The  above-cited  memorial  bein^  read,  our  most  holy  lord,  the  Pope 
aforesaid,  having  heard  the  suffrages  of  the  same  Most  Eminent 
[persons,]  decreed  that  the  aforesaid  John  Clement  Gordon,  the 
petitioner,  be  promoted  anew  to  all  the  orders,  even  the  holy,  and  of 
the  priesthood  ;  and  inasmuch  as  he  has  never  been  fortified  by  the 
sacrament  of  confirmation,  that  he  be  confirmed. 

Joseph  Bartolus,  S.  R., 
Et  Universalis  Inquisitionis  Notarius. 
Locus  f  Sigilli. 

All  that  I  wish  to  say  on  this  petition  I  may  express  in  the  words 
of  Dr.  Elrington,  merely  putting  his  quotations  from  Gordon  in 
English : 

"  The  first  request  made  by  Gordon  is,  that  the  Pope  should  declare 
ordination  of  this  sort  (that  conferred  in  the  Episcopal  Church  of 
Scotland)  to  be  unlawful  and  void.'  This  proves  beyond  the  pos- 
sibility of  doubt  that  no  determination  had  previously  been  made 
upon  the  question  of  re-ordination,  and  establishes  this  petition  and 
the  investigation  which  it  gave  rise  to,  as  the  sole  ground  upon  which 
the  resolution,  declaring  our  ordination  to  be  invalid,  was  made;  thus 
supplying  us  with  the  means  of  judging  whether  that  determination 
was  well  or  ill-founded. 

"  The  next  sentence  contains  a  statement  notoriously  false,  asserting 
that  the  greater  part  of  the  English  Protestants  themselves  deemed  our 
orders  to  be  invalid.  Your  petitioner,  with  the  most  part  of  the 
Catholics  and  even  of  the  heretics,  thinks  that  the  ordinations  of  the 
heterodox  Anglicans  can  by  no  means  be  declared  valid.  To  say  that  a 
large  proportion  of  Protestants  deemed  our  orders  invalid,  must  have 
had  great  M'eight  w^ith  the  Pope,  who  unquestionably  was  led  to  con- 
sider that  opinion  to  be  a  decisive  proof  that  the  Nag's  Head  story  was 
believed  among  ourselves.  There  is  no  man  acquainted  with  the 
Presbyterian  controversy  who  does  not  know  this  assertion  to  be  to- 


169 

tally  destitute  of  foundation  ;  who  does  not  know  that  no  Presbyte- 
rian writer  ever  defended  the  Nag's  Head  story,  or  made  any  objec- 
tion to  our  orders  except  their  being  too  popish. 

"  It  should  not  escape  observation,  that  this  sentence  expressly  ad- 
mits the  denial  of  our  orders  not  to  have  been  universal  among 
Koman  Catholics;  this  the  words,  tviih  the  most  part  of  the  Catholics, 
plainly  prove. 

"  The  petition  next  states  that  our  ordinations  must  be  invalid,  un- 
less we  have  preserved  the  essential  matter,  form  and  intention. 
This  is  perfectly  correct;  but  when  Gordon  comes  to  explain  what 
he  allows  to  be  the  matter  used  at  our  consecration,  he  chooses  to  for- 
get the  Imposition  of  Hands,  the  only  essential  matter  of  ordination, 
and  asserts  that  we  use  no  matter  except  perhaps  the  delivery  of  the 
Bible :  Here  is  a  flxlse  statement  of  a  fact  so  important,  that  if  the 
Pope  believed  it,  he  could  not  but  have  decided  against  our  orders  ; 
and  it  appears  by  the  conclusion  of  the  account  given  by  Le  Quien, 
that  he  did  believe  it  and  every  other  fact  stated  by  Gordon,  for  the 
decision  was  made  without  any  other  evidence  having  been  gone  into, 
except  the  nnrere  reading  his  petition. 

"  Gordon  next  asserts  that  the  only  form  used  was  :  Take  thou  ^ 
authority  to  preach  the  word  of  God,  and  administer  his  holy  sacra- 
ments. He  had  omitted  to  state  the  Imposition  of  Hands,  and 
he  here  omits  the  words  used  with  that  solemn  action,  which  con- 
stitute a  most  important  part  of  the  form  of  ordination.  His  state- 
ment as  to  the  form  being  admitted,  the  determination  of  the  Pope 
must  have  been  against  our  orders ;  but  that  statement  we  know  was 
false,  and  so  did  Gordon  also  know  when  he  made  it. 

"  He  then  notices  the  defect  of  intention,  arising  from  our  denial  of 
the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  and  here  indeed  his  fact  is  true,  but  the 
reasoning  from  it  we  have  already  seen,  on  the  authority  of  Bellar- 
mine  and  of  the  Synod  of  Evreaux,  to  be  totally  erroneous  ;  the  in- 
tention to  ordain  to  the  office  for  which  Christ  had  ordained,  even 
though  accompanied  with  an  explicit,  nay  an  heretical  error  as  to  the 
nature  of  that  office,  being  sufficient. 

"I  have  followed  this  subject  of  the  matter,  form  and  intention, 
through  the  whole  of  the  petition,  that  1  might  not  separate  the  parts 
of  so  important  a  discussion.  I  now  return  to  where  it  was  first 
mentioned,  and  there  I  find  it  noticed  that  we  can  have  no  ordination 
but  what  was  derived  to  us  through  Roman  Catholic  bishops ;  but  to 
this  truth  is  subjoined  a  statement,  contrived  with  such  Jesuitical  art, 
that  though  the  assertion  taken  literally  is  not  false,  yet  it  inevitably 


170 

excites  an  idea  which  is  decidedly  false.  Kitchen,  of  Llandaff,  is 
named  by  Gordon  as  the  only  Roman  Catholic  bishop  who  came 
over  to  the  Protestants  in  the  beginning  of  Elizabeth's  reign ;  and 
then  he  proceeds  with  his  story,  tacitly  assuming  that  he  was  the 
only  bishop  from  whom  Parker,  etc.,  could  have  obtained  consecra- 
tion, and  relating  his  refusal,  and  then  giving  the  story  of  the  appli- 
cation to  the  Irish  Archbishop  in  the  Tower,  he  describes  the  Nag's 
Head  consecration  as  the  resource  to  which,  of  necessity,  they  were 
driven. 

"  It  being  believed  that  there  was  no  bishop  who  could  consecrate 
except  Kitchen,  his  refusal  necessarily  proved  that  there  had  been  no 
real  consecration  ;  and  we  see  clearly  that  Gordon's  assertion,  true, 
indeed,  if  we  understand  it  of  bishops  in  possession  of  their  sees,  but 
untrue  if  we  take  it. to  include  all  English  bishops  actually  consecra- 
ted, was  never  examined  into,  but  admitted  in  that  sense  in  which  it 
led  to  the  determination  he  wished  for.  It  is  unnecessary  to  detain 
the  reader  by  repeating  what  has  been  already  said  as  to  the  number 
of  Protestant  bishops  who  had  been  rescued  by  Providence  from  the 
persecution  of  jNIary,  to  continue  the  hierarchy  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land— as  unnecessary  is  it  to  refute  the  story  of  the  Irish  Archbishop.* 

"  As  to  Scorye,  Gordon  makes  no  ceremony  with  him,  but  says 
boldly  that  he  was  an  apostate  monl\  not  a  bishop :  the  falsehood  of 
which  assertion  a  little  inquiry  would  have  disclosed  ;  but  the  Pope 
made  no  inquiry. 

"  For  the  Nag's  Head  story  Gordon  gives  Haberley  as  his  author- 
ity, on  the  faith  of  Neal  (misprinted  Keal),  but  he  chooses  to  give 
Neal  credit  with  the  Pope,  by  stating  him  to  have  been  in  exile  on 
account  of  his  religion,  of  which  exile  nobody  but  Gordon  ever  heard. 
Indeed  the  account  of  Neal,  as  given  by  Wood,  in  his  Antiquities  of 

*  This  too,  as  well  as  the  story  which  it  is  brought  to  embellish,  is  a  pure  fic- 
tion. The  first  mention  of  it  was  in  a  posthumous  publication  of  Sanders,  who 
•  referred  to  an  Irish  Archbishop,  without  giving  his  name.  A  subsequent  writer, 
Fitz-Simons,  in  order  to  invest  the  fiction  with  an  air  of  particularity,  affirmed 
that  his  name  was  CreagJi,  which  a  still  later  writer  improved  into  Richard 
Creigk.  It  has  been  clearly  proved,  however,  that  there  was  no  Irish  Arch- 
bishop living  at  that  time  who  could  have  acted  the  part  assigned  to  him.  See 
Elrington,  p.  62,  Browne's  Story  of  the  Ordination,  p.  42,  and  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic Le  Courayer,  vol.  ii.,p.  157,  &c.,who  has  clearly  shown  the  impossibility  of  the 
alleged  fact,  and  who  indeed  has  so  completely  exhausted  the  argument  in  favor 
of  the  Anglican  Ordinations,  that  the  English  divines  who  have  lived  since  his 
time  (Mason,  Bramhall,  and  Burnet  had  written  on  the  same  subject  before  himj 
have  done  little  more  than  repeat  what  he  has  said. 


171 

Oxford,  is  inconsistent  with  his  ever  having  been  the  author  of  the 
•Nag's  Head  story,  eith-er  at  home  or  abroad;  for  he  was  appointed 
Hebrew  Lecturer  in  1558  or  1559,  by  Elizabeth,  and  held  the  office 
for  many  years ;  he  took  a  distinguished  part  in  the  reception  of  Eliza- 
beth at  Oxford,  in  1566,  and  was  particularly  noticed  by  her ;  and  in 
1590,  he  erected  a  monument  for  himself  in  Cassington  Church,  near 
which  he  lived  after  retiring  from  Oxford,  continuing  to  go  some- 
times to  Church,  though  not  entirely  a  Protestant ;  and  there  is  reason 
to  believe  that  he  died  in  the  course  of  the  year  in  which  this  monu- 
ment was  erected.  We  have  here  no  interval  of  time  in  which 
Neal  could  have  been  an  exile,  nor  any  sufficient  cause  for  his  leaving 
England;  and  his  reception  in  1566  by  Elizabeth,  is  utterly  incon- 
sistent with  his  having  been  employed  to  prevent  the  consecration  of 
Parker. 

"  Gordon  relates  the  form  used  in  the  Nag's  Head  consecration  from 
the  account  given  by  Eitzsimon ;  and,  that  nothing  might  be  wanting 
to  the  story,  he  confidently  asserts  Parker  to  have  been  a  layman, 
though  he  must  have  known  that  he  had  been  ordained  a  priest  in 
1527,  according  to  the  Romish  ritual. 

"  This  circumstance  alone  is  sufficient  to  show  how  little'regard  was 
paid  to  truth,  even  in  a  solenni  application  to  the  Pope,  and  thai  too 
of  such  a  nature,  that  to  deceive  was  to  incur  the  guilt  of  sacrilege,  for 
such  the  crime  of  reiterating  orders  already  given  is  deemed  to  be 
by  those  who  esteem  orders  to  be  a  sacrament. 

"  Gordon  proceeds  to  state,  that  in  1613  there  came  out  a  book 
by  Francis  Mason,  in  which  he  pretends  to  have  found  a  record  of 
our  bishops  having  been  ordained  by  Catholics ;  but  that  this  story 
was  rejected  by  all,  as  he  adduced  no  proof  of  his  assertion. 

"  Now,  we  know  that  INlason  never  made  the  assertion  here  impu- 
ted to  him,  for  the  bishops  he  names  as  consecrators  of  Parker  were 
Protestants;  and  we  also  know  that  he  did  adduce  proof  of  his  narra- 
tive, for  he  stated  where  the  record  which  he  referred  to  was  to  be 
found,  and  Gordon  knew  that  it  had  been  examined  by  his  own  party, 
and  no  mark  of  forgery  discovered  in  it. 

"  The  memorial  concludes  by  stating,  that  it  had  always  been  the 
practice  in  England  to  re-ordain  any  of  our  clergy  who  became  con- 
verts  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  How  little  truth  there  was  in  this 
statement,  we  have  seen  already  in  examining  the  Bull  of  Pope  Julius, 
and  the  proceedings  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Mary. 

"  Upon  no  other  evidence  whatsoever,  except  this  memorial,  Pope 


172 

Clement  the  Eleventh,  and  his  consistory,  ordered  Gordon  to  be  or- 
dained, thus  pronouncing  the  orders  he  had  received  to  be  invalid. 

"  Had  we  known  only  the  decision,  without  any  information  as  to 
the  grounds  upon  which  it  was  made,  it  would  hardly  be  considered 
justifiable  by  Roman  Catholics  to  set  up  their  own  opinion  against 
that  of  the  Pope  and  Cardinals  ;  but,  as  infallibility  does  not  extend 
to  matter  of  fact,  they  will,  I  hope,  think  it  not  unwarrantable  to  ques- 
tion a  decree  founded  upon  such  statements  as  those  contained  in  Gor- 
don's petition." 

It  appears  then  that  this  pretty  romance  (I  may  use  the  word  with 
etymological  propriety)  is  the  ground  on  which  the  successors  of 
Paul  III.  and  Plus  V.  have  decreed  the  nullity  of  the  English  Ordina- 
tions. To  us  the  decision  is  of  no  moment ;  since  all  that  has  been 
written  and  said  against  our  orders  is  not  enough  to  create  in  any 
candid  mind  even  a  doubt  or  suspicion  of  their  validity.  For  the  Ro- 
manists, however,  the  decision  has  been  unfortunate  ;  inasmuch  as  it 
has  led  to  the  iteration  of  orders  in  the  case  of  those  clergymen  who 
have  been  perverted  from  us  and  taken  to  minister  at  their  altars, 
and  thus  polluted  their  communion  at  its  fountain  head  with  the 
awful  guilt  of  sacrilege,  or  sin  against  the  Holt  Ghost. 


V. — Preface,  Page  vi.  , 

Speaking  of  the  separation  of  the  Puritans  from  the  Church  of 
England,  Bishop  Stillingfleet  observes  : 

*'  But  if  we  trace  the  footsteps  of  this  separation  as  far  as  we  can, 
we  may  find  strong  probabilities  that  the  Jesuitical  party  had  a  great 
influence  on  the  very  first  beginnings  of  it.  For  which  we  must  con- 
sider that,  when  the  Church  of  England  was  restored  in  Queen  Eliza- 
beth's reign,  there  was  no  open  separaticfh  from  the  communion  of  it 
for  several  years,  neither  by  Papists  nor  Non-Conformists.  At  last, 
the  more  zealous  party  of  the  foreign  priests  and  Jesuits,  finding  this 
compliance  would,  in  the  end,  utterly  destroy  the  popish  interest  in 
England,  they  began  to  draw  off  the  secret  papists  from  all  con- 
formity with  our  Church,  which  the  old  Queen  Mary's  priests  allowed 
theni  in  :  this  raised  some  heat  among  themselves,  but  at  last  the 
way  of  separation  prevailed,  as  the  more  pure  and  perfect  way.  But 
this  was  not  thought  sufficient  by  these  busy  factors  for  the  Church 
of  Rome,  unless  they  could,  under  the  same  pretence  of  purity  and 
perfection,  draw  off  Protestants  from  the  communion  of  this  Church, 


173 

too.  To  this  purpose  persons  were  employed,  under  the  disguise  of 
more  zealous  Protestants,  to  set  up  the  way  of  more  spiritual  prayer 
and  greater  purity  of  worship  than  was  observed  in  the  Church  of 
England  :  that  so  the  people,  under  these  pretences,  might  be  drawn 
into  separate  meetings.  Of  this  we  have  a  considerable  evidence 
lately  offered  to  the  world,  in  the  examination  of  a  priest  so  employed 
at  the  Council  Table,  A.  D.,  1567,  being  the  nintii  of  Queen  Eliza- 
beth, which  is  published  from  the  Lord  Burleigh's  Papers,  which  were 
in  the  hands  of  Archbishop  Usher,  and  from  him  came  to  Sir  James 
Ware,  whose  son  brought  them  into  England,  and  lately  caused  them 
to  be  printed.  Two  years  after,  one  Heath,  a  Jesuit,  was  summoned 
before  the  Bishop  of  Rochester  on  a  like  account  for  disparaging  the 
prayers  of  the  Church,  and  setting  up  spiritual  prayers  above  them  ; 
and  he  declared  to  the  bishops  '  that  he  had  been  six  years  in  England, 
and  that  he  had  labored  to  refine  the  Protestants,  and  to  take  off  all 
smacks  of  ceremonies,  and  to  make  the  Church  purer.'  When  he 
was  seized  on,  a  letter  was  found  about  him  from  a  Jesuit  in  Spain, 
wherein  he  takes  notice  how  he  was  admired  by  his  fluck,  and  tells 
him  they  looked  on  this  way  of  dividing  Protestants  as  the  most 
effectual  to  bring  them  all  back  to  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  and  in  his 
chamber  they  found  a  Bull  from  Pius  V,  to  follow  the  instructions  of 
the  Society  for  Dividing  the  Protestants  in  England,  and  the  license 
from  his  fraternity.  (Foxes  and  Firebrands:  16S0.)  There  is  one 
thing  in  the  Jesuit's  letter  deserves  our  farther  consideration,  which 
the  publishers  of  it  did  not  understand — which  is,  that  Ilallingham, 
Coleman,  and  Benson,  are  there  mentioned  as  persons  employed  to 
sow  a  faction  among  the  German  heretics  ;  which  he  takes  to  be 
spoken  of  the  sects  in  Germany  ;  but  by  the  German  heretics  thfe  . 
English  Protestants  are  meant,  i.  e.,  Lutherans  :  and  these  very  men 
are  mentioned  by  our  historians,  without  knowing  of  this  letter,  as 
rtie  most  active  and  busy  in  the  beginning  of  the  separation.  Of 
these  (saith  Fuller)  Coleman,  Button,  Hallingham,  and  Benson,  were 
the  chief  At  which  time  (saith  Heylin)  Benson,  Button,  Hallingham 
and  Coleman,  and  others,  taking  upon  them  to  be  of  more  ardent  zeal 
than  others,  &e.  That  time  is  15G8,  which  agrees  exactly  with  the  date 
of  that  letter  at  Madrid,  October  26th,  1568.  And  both  these  had  it 
from  a  much  better  author  than  either  of  them,  Camden,  I  mean,  who 
saith  :  That  while  Harding,  Sanders,  and  others,  attacked  our  Church 
on  one  side  ;  Coleman,  Button,  Hallingham,  Benson  and  others, 
were  busy  on  the  other  ;  who,  under  pretence  of  a  purer  reformation, 
opposed  the  discipline,  liturgy,  and  calling  of  our  bishops,  as  approach- 
ing too  near  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  And  he  makes  these  the  begin- 
ners of  those  quarrels  which  afterwards  brake  out  with  great  violence. 
Now,  that  there  is  no  improbability  in  the  thing,  will  appear  by  the 
suitableness  of  these  pretences  about  spiritual  prayer,  to  the  doctrine 
and  practices  of  the  Jesuits.  For  they  are  professed  despisers  of  the 
Cathedral  Service,  and  are  excused  from  their  attendance  on  it  by 
the  constitutions  of  their  order;  and  are  as  great  admirers  of  spirit- 
ual prayer  and  an  enthusiastic  way  of  preaching,  as  appears  by  the 
history  of  the  first  institution  of  theiriorder,  by  Orlandinus  and  Maf- 


174 

feius.  They  who  are  acquainted  with  their  doctrine  of  spiritual 
prayer,  will  find  that  which  is  admired  and  set  up  here,  as  so  much 
above  set  forms,  to  be  one  of  the  lowest  of  the  three  sorts  among 
them.  That  gift  of  prayer  which  men  have,  but  requires  the  exercise 
of  their  own  gifts  to  stir  it  up,  they  call  oratio  acqidsita,  acquired 
prayer  ;  although  they  say  the  principle  of  it  is  infused.  The  second 
is,  by  a  a  sjoecial  immediate  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  the  mind, 
with  the  concurrence  of  infused  habits.  The  third  is  far  above  either 
of  these,  which  they  call  the  23rayer  of  contemplation,  and  is  never 
given  by  way  of  habit  to  any,  but  lies  in  immediate  and  tinexpressible 
tinio7is.  All  these  I  could  easily  show  to  be  the  doctrine  received 
and  magnified  by  the  Eoman  Church,  especially  by  those  who  pre- 
tend to  greater  purity  and  spirituality  than  others.  But  this  is  suffi- 
cient for  my  purpose,  to  prove  that  there  is  no  improbability  that 
they  should  be  the  first  setters  up  of  this  way  in  England." — StilUng- 
fieet's  Unreasonableness  of  Separation — Prefiice,  pp.  11-14. 


FINIS, 


ERRATA. 

Page  26,  for  D,  read  ItfM. 
Page  19,  for  I,  read  J. 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 

0035519339 


BRITTLE  DO  NOT 
PHOTOCOPY     * 


•  ^^r^w    ■.<-rC% 


^\      ,>'.. 


'^   ■ ''v'A;-^VV^'^ 


uy 


-Vv^U^" 


••<^i 


iiihv;^^-tl 


1\':':.i 


' 


.^.■^■^  V? 


